Retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple

Posted on 23.07.201923.07.2019 by -

retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple

One major issue that can cause friction in a marriage is when one spouse wants to retire and the other doesn't. On the other hand, couples who have always had marital problems or feel dissatisfied with their marriage before retirement, are likely to continue. Health Insurance and Retirement of Married Couples. Abstract. In this study we propose a new explanation for the fact that labor force participation of.

watch the thematic video

Relationship Reboot: Staying Happily Married After Retirement

Retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple - can suggest

Financial Benefits of Marriage vs. Being Single – What’s Better?

Each year, about 2 million Americans get married, according to figures from the National Center for Health Statistics. No doubt all those newlyweds — or at least most of them — believe tying the knot will make them happier. What they might not think about is whether it could also make them wealthier.

A 2005 study from The Ohio State University (OSU) found that people saw a sharp increase in their level of wealth after getting married. After 10 years of marriage, the couples reported an average net worth of around $43,000 compared to $11,000 for people who had stayed single.

However, people who had married and then divorced were worse off than any other group. After a divorce, the average man was left with $8,500 in assets, while the average divorced woman had only $3,400.

As this study shows, getting married has risks as well as benefits. Furthermore, many factors play a role in how marriage affects your finances. The benefits of marriage vary based on your income, your living situation, and (most of all) whether you have children.

Motley Fool Stock Advisor recommendations have an average return of 618%. For $79 (or just $1.52 per week), join more than 1 million members and don't miss their upcoming stock picks. 30 day money-back guarantee. Sign Up Now

As a result, it’s impossible to say that married people are always financially better off than single people or vice versa. What is possible is to examine the financial pluses and minuses of marriage and figure out how they might affect you, either now or in the future.

Costs and Benefits of Marriage

The OSU study doesn’t explore the reasons married couples can sock away more money, but the author, Jay Zagorsky, suggests several possibilities.

Married couples can save money by sharing household expenses and duties. Additionally, couples enjoy many benefits single people don’t when it comes to insurance, retirement, and taxes.

But being married carries some financial costs as well. For example, weddings are a significant expense for many couples. Also, the tax laws that benefit some couples result in a penalty for others. And finally, there’s always the risk a marriage will end in divorce, which is one of the biggest financial setbacks you can suffer.

Wedding Debt

Many couples start married life with a substantial one-time expense: a big wedding. According to a 2021 LendEDU survey, the average wedding in the United States costs over $10,000. A 2019 survey by The Knot came up with an even higher average: nearly $30,000. Either way, it’s a lot to spend on a one-day event.

More troubling still is that many couples go into debt to pay for their big day. About 1 in 3 couples in the LendEDU survey borrowed money for wedding costs. These couples spent more — close to $18,000, on average — and borrowed nearly two-thirds of that.

That’s a big problem for both their finances and their future happiness. A 2012 study by the New Economics Foundation shows that people who have credit card debt are generally unhappier, and unmanageable debt can lead to mental problems like anxiety and depression.

The Marriage Penalty

After the honeymoon is over, married couples come home and settle into a new routine together. One of the changes many newlyweds have to adjust to is filing a joint tax return. And in certain cases, that means dealing with the marriage penalty.

The marriage penalty exists because tax brackets — the income levels at which tax rates shift — aren’t always exactly twice as high for couples as they are for single people. As a result, couples who file their taxes jointly sometimes pay more than they would as two single people.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 eliminated the marriage penalty for most Americans. However, it can still apply to couples making over $622,050 per year. They pay a higher percentage of that income in taxes than a single person making $311,000.

But even high-income couples don’t always pay this penalty. If one spouse earns all or most of the income, the couple may get a “marriage bonus” instead. In other words, they pay less in taxes for their joint income than they would individually.

Ironically, very low-income couples can also face a marriage penalty. That’s because people who qualify for the earned income tax credit (EITC) get less money back when they file a joint return.

In 2020, a childless couple with a combined income of $17,000 would get only $359 from the EITC. By contrast, two single people making $8,500 would each get $538. Getting married would cost this low-income couple $717 — about 4% of their total income.

Other Tax Issues

Leaving the marriage penalty aside, married couples definitely get some tax perks that aren’t available to single people. These include:

Extra Deductions. Even if your income doesn’t double after marriage, your income tax deductions can. The standard deduction the IRS allows for couples is exactly twice as high as the deduction for single people. These doubled deductions effectively give a bonus to couples with one nonworking spouse who wouldn’t file a tax return otherwise. They get to take a deduction for both spouses rather than just the one who’s working.
Estate Taxes. If you leave behind a substantial estate when you die — “substantial” meaning $11.7 million or more in 2021 — the government skims an estate tax off before the money passes to your heirs. But any money you leave directly to your legal spouse is exempt from this tax. If you have $20 million and leave it all to your spouse, the government can’t touch a penny of it.
Gift Taxes. Some people try to get around the estate tax by giving large sums of cash to relatives before they die. To close this loophole, the IRS charges a gift tax on any gifts of $15,000 or more. However, like the estate tax, this tax doesn’t apply to your spouse. You can give your spouse any sum of money — or other valuable items, such as jewelry — without paying tax on it.
Home Sales. When you sell your home, you don’t have to pay capital gains tax on the first $250,000 of profit if you’re single. But if you’re married, and you and your spouse have both lived in the house for at least two of the last five years, this exemption doubles. That means you can make $500,000 on the sale of your home and pay no tax at all.

Health Benefits

Married couples often have more choices for health insurance coverage. If employers of both spouses provide health plans, they can each keep their own workplace coverage or they can both join one spouse’s plan. That gives them more options to choose the doctors they prefer or save money on premiums.

If one spouse doesn’t have health coverage from work, health benefits are even more critical. Getting married makes it possible for the uninsured spouse to get coverage through the other spouse’s employer. That’s usually more affordable than paying for an individual policy.

Retirement Benefits

Married couples have more options when it comes to retirement benefits as well. These include:

IRA Contributions. If you’re single and unemployed, you can’t contribute to an individual retirement account (IRA). However, if you’re a stay-at-home spouse, you can set up a spousal IRA and contribute from your joint income.
Inherited Benefits. In many cases, if you inherit another person’s Roth IRA, you must start making withdrawals from it promptly. But if you inherit your spouse’s Roth IRA, you have the option to transfer it to a Roth IRA in your own name and make no withdrawals until you retire.
Social Security. Married couples have many more options for collecting Social Security benefits. You can either collect your own benefits or take a payment equal to 50% of your spouse’s benefit — even if that’s more than you’d be entitled to on your own. You can also choose to delay your own benefits to increase the payout and take the spousal benefit in the meantime. Even a nonworking spouse who has never contributed to Social Security at all can still collect spousal benefits.

The Risk of Divorce

Perhaps the greatest financial risk of getting married is the possibility of ending up divorced. While being married is generally better for your wallet than being single, getting a divorce cancels that benefit — and then some.

The OSU study shows that on average, divorced people have 77% less wealth than single people in the same age group.

Interestingly, the drop in a couple’s fortunes doesn’t happen immediately after the divorce. In fact, the couple’s wealth usually starts to decline about four years before they end the marriage.

Zagorsky, the author of the study, says that could happen because many couples separate before they officially divorce, taking on the additional cost of maintaining separate households. Another possibility is that the stress of a failing marriage hurts each spouse’s ability to work and earn money.

The impact of divorce continues long after a couple splits up. The newly single people see their wealth start to creep upward again within a year, but it doesn’t increase very fast. Even 10 years after a divorce, their median wealth is still below $10,000 — less than the $11,000 average for people who stayed single.

The Role of Parenthood

Bringing up children is a huge expense. The 2017 U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Expenditures on Children by Families report shows that a family with a child born in 2015 can expect to spend more than $233,000 raising that child to adulthood.

Decades ago, this cost seldom affected single people. An analysis by the Pew Research Center shows that in 1968, only 7% of parents living with a child were unmarried. By 2017, 1 in 4 parents living with children was single, and 1 in 4 children lived with just one parent.

And in 2019, 40% of all babies were born to single parents, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Vital Statistics Report.

Having children is a financial game-changer for both single and married people. Child care and increased housing costs eat up a large share of any parent’s income.

However, there’s no doubt that raising kids is easier with two people to share the burden. Not only do couples tend to have higher incomes, but they also have more choices for dealing with child care.

Child Care Costs

A 2021 survey by Care.com found that more than half of all families spent over $10,000 on child care in 2020. For a family with two children in day care, the average cost is $640 per week — over $30,000 per year. More than 85% of parents say they spend at least 10% of their income on child care.

However, for many married couples, there are ways of avoiding this cost. Couples have options that aren’t available to most single parents, such as:

Stay-at-Home Parenting. Some parents avoid child care costs by having one spouse quit working at least for a year or so to care for the children full-time. Mothers are more likely than fathers to take on this role. A 2018 Pew study found that in 2016, 27% of all mothers were stay-at-home moms and 7% of fathers were stay-at-home dads.
Work-at-Home Parenting. New technologies, such as email and teleconferencing, make it possible for some parents to work from home. Although this job arrangement is sometimes possible for single parents, couples with two jobs have double the chance of making it work. It’s also easier when the other parent has a full-time job since many work-at-home opportunities are freelance, and freelance jobs often have unpredictable income and no benefits.
Split-Shift Parenting. Some parents choose to adjust their schedules so one of them is always at home with the kids. For example, one parent works the overnight shift and returns home before the other leaves for work in the morning. Split-shift parenting means both parents get to spend time with their children, but it leaves them very little time to spend with each other, which can strain the marriage.

Housing Costs

According to the USDA report, housing costs are the single most significant factor in the cost of raising a child. For married, middle-income parents, nearly 30% of the money spent on a first child goes toward increased housing costs. Child care and education account for only 16%.

Part of the reason for this is that a bigger family simply needs more space. A family with two children needs at least two bedrooms, preferably three, while a single person or a couple with no children can get by with one.

However, parents also tend to pay more for housing because they want their kids to go to the best schools, and homes in these school districts tend to be expensive.

Every year, the education review website Niche names the top school districts in the country. It also provides links to nearby homes for each district. In 7 of the top 10 districts for 2022, a three-bedroom home costs at least $380,000. By contrast, Zillow puts the typical home price for the whole country at just over $308,000.

Fortunately, there are some exceptions to this rule. For instance, the top school district on Niche’s list is in Lincolnshire, Illinois, where three-bedroom homes start at around $290,000. And in No. 4 Vernon, Illinois, they can go for under $170,000.

Websites like Finder and 24WallSt have identified affordable neighborhoods with good schools throughout the U.S. Choosing a home in one of these neighborhoods can help parents keep their housing costs in check while still giving their children an excellent education.

Tax Breaks for Parents

Because raising children is so expensive, the IRS provides an array of tax breaks for parents to help offset the cost. These include:

The Child Tax Credit. This credit reduces parents’ taxes by up to $2,000 per child. Married couples with combined incomes up to $400,000 can take the full amount. So can single parents with incomes up to $200,000, regardless of whether they file as single, head of household, or qualifying widow or widower. Above these income levels, the credit gradually shrinks. Since the amount for a couple is twice the amount for an individual, this perk is exactly as good for single or married parents.
The Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit. Parents who have to pay for child care can deduct a portion of these costs through the child and dependent care tax credit. This credit provides up to $3,000 for the care of a child under 13 and up to $6,000 for two or more. There’s no income limit for this tax credit, but the percentage of your costs you get back is lower for higher incomes. It starts at 35% for incomes up to $15,000 and gradually drops down to 20% for incomes of $43,000 or more, no matter your filing status. That means a single parent with a $30,000 income who pays $10,000 per year for day care, could get back 27% of that amount, or $2,700. By contrast, a married couple with a $60,000 income and the same day care expenses would get back only 20% of the cost, or $2,000 — just $1,000 per person.
Flexible Spending Accounts. Parents can also offset their child care costs by using a flexible spending account (FSA) if their employer offers one. With an FSA, a parent can set aside up to $5,000 in pretax dollars for child care. It’s an alternative to taking the child and dependent care tax credit in most cases. However, parents who have two or more children and child care expenses of more than $5,000 per year can do both. They can set aside $5,000 in an FSA and claim a tax credit for up to $1,000 in costs over that amount.

Having a child also increases the amount you can get from the earned income tax credit. The maximum credit for people with no children is $1,502 for tax year 2021. However, this amount jumps to $3,618 for people with one child and maxes out at $6,728 for parents with three kids or more. These numbers are the same for single and married parents.

Having kids makes it easier to qualify for the EITC as well. A single person with no children needs an income of $21,430 or less to qualify, but a single person with one child can qualify with up to $42,158 in income. For a married couple, the limits are $27,380 with no kids and $48,108 with one. Additional children increase these limits still more.

The IRS’s EITC Assistant shows how the EITC differs for single parents and married ones. For the tax year 2020, a married couple with two children at home and an adjusted gross income (AGI) of $40,000 would get $2,802 from the EITC — just $1,401 per person.

By contrast, a single person with two children at home and an AGI of $20,000, filing as head of household, would get $5,774. So this is a case where the marriage penalty deals a big blow to married couples.

Tax Filing Status

Most tax credits are available both for couples who file joint returns and single parents who file as head of household. Parents who file as head of household have lower tax rates than other single people, and they can also take a higher standard deduction. Compared to married couples, they pay more in taxes for the same amount of income, but they still end up paying less per person.

For example, suppose a head of household earns $60,000 per year and takes the standard deduction, the child tax credit, and $2,000 from the child and dependent care tax credit. After these deductions and credits, this person would owe $660 in taxes on that income.

A married couple with the same $60,000 in income between them using the same deductions and credits would pay no tax at all. However, a married couple where each spouse earned $60,000 for a combined income of $120,000 would pay $8,375, more than 10 times as much as the single head of household.

In short, this is a case in which single parents get a much-needed break.

Sharing a Home

OSU study author Zagorsky speculated that the reason married couples save more than single people could be that they’re more likely to share a household. By sharing expenses such as rent, food, and utilities, they can spend less than two single people who live alone.

The annual Consumer Expenditure Survey conducted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics supports this theory. It shows that the average single person spends $45,701 per year, while the average two-income couple spends $78,249. By combining their expenses, the couple saves $13,153 each year.

However, these benefits aren’t just for married couples. Single people can get them by sharing a home with a roommate, a family member, or a significant other. Sharing a household is one of the best ways for single people to close the wealth gap and start saving early for big expenses down the road.

Shared Expenses

According to an old saying, “Two can live as cheaply as one.” That’s not exactly accurate, but it’s definitely true that two people living together and sharing all their expenses can live more cheaply than two people maintaining separate households.

Housing costs are a good example. Suppose two people live in identical one-bedroom apartments, each paying $1,620 per month — roughly the national average, according to Rent.com. If they move in together and share just one of these apartments, they immediately cut their rent in half.

Even if they upgrade to a two-bedroom apartment to give themselves more space, they can still cut their total housing bill by a sizable amount. The average monthly rent for a two-bedroom apartment is only about $1,880, so they’d still cut their costs by about 42%.

People sharing a household can save on all sorts of other expenses as well. It’s easier for them to buy groceries in bulk — for instance, getting a gallon of milk instead of a half-gallon without worrying it’ll go bad before they finish it. They can share one landline phone bill, combine their home insurance policies, and share loads at the coin laundry.

All these savings can add up to thousands of dollars each year.

Shared Responsibilities

People who live alone also have to do all the work of maintaining the home by themselves. Keeping up with household tasks like cleaning, cooking, and laundry can feel overwhelming.

After a while, it’s tempting to hire someone else to take care of it — and that can get expensive. According to Angi (formerly Angie’s List), the average cost of a house cleaning is around $170. Getting one every two weeks would come to $4,420 per year.

By contrast, living with a partner or a roommate can ease the burden on both of you. If one person cooks dinner, the other can do the dishes. If one does the laundry, the other can clean the bathroom. Since cooking or cleaning for two people doesn’t take much longer than doing it for one, that cuts way down on the amount of time these chores take.

People who live alone also spend more in less obvious ways. For instance, when you’re going through a crunch at work, you often get home late and don’t have the time or energy to cook. If you share your home, you can ask your partner or your roommate to take over the cooking until your work crisis is over.

But if you live alone and don’t have this option, you’re more likely to end up eating out at restaurants every night. Eating out costs a lot more than cooking at home — anywhere from $5 for a burger and fries at McDonald’s to $100 or more at a French bistro.

Alternatively, you might turn to convenience foods from the grocery store, such as frozen dinners, to get you through your busy period. These are cheaper than a restaurant meal, but they’re still far more expensive than cooking from scratch.

Final Word

There’s no doubt marriage offers some advantages compared to being single. However, both financially and emotionally, it’s much better to stay single than to marry the wrong person. Marrying someone who doesn’t share your values and goals is a good recipe for a bumpy marriage and a painful and expensive divorce.

So if you’re single now but plan to marry someday, the most important thing you can do is choose your partner carefully. Ensure you understand and agree with each other’s financial goals so you’re working together and not against each other.

And if you’re already married, it’s not too late to have this conversation. By taking the time to talk about your financial needs and goals, you can keep your marriage and finances strong.

Stock Advisor

Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html]

Marital Quality Change .00 (.04) −.11 (.23) Personal Control Change 1.04 (.24)^***−5.47 (1.22)^***F28.68^***18.98^***15.81^***24.43^***16.72^***14.18^***df (Model/Residual) 6/271 9/268 17/260 6/271 9/268 17/260 R²/Adjusted R².39/.38 .39/.37 .51/.48 .35/.34 .36/.34 .48/.45

Open in new tab

Table 2.

Regressing Retirement Status/Transitions and Other Variables on Men's Psychological Well-Being at Time 2

Dependent Variables
Morale at Time 2			Depressive Symptoms at Time 2
Independent Variables	Model 1 b (SE)	Model 2 b (SE)	Model 3 b (SE)	Model 1 b (SE)	Model 2 b (SE)	Model 3 b (SE)
Age	.01 (.02)	.01 (.02)	−.00 (.02)	−.07 (.08)	−.08 (.08)	−.09 (.08)
T1WB	.71 (.14)^***	.72 (.14)^***	.53 (.13)^***	.32 (.15)^*	.36 (.15)^*	.29 (.14)^*
Retirement Status/Transitions
CR	.08 (.22)	.11 (.34)	.21 (.31)	.79 (1.12)	−1.33 (1.69)	−1.55 (1.55)
NR	.33 (.25)	.37 (.40)	.35 (.38)	.01 (1.12)	−1.31 (1.98)	−1.67 (1.92)
Not retired^a
CR × T1WB	−.00 (.15)	−.01 (.15)	−.04 (.14)	.38 (.16)^*	.34 (.16)^*	.22 (.15)
NR × T1WB	−.49 (.18)^**	−.49 (.19)^**	−.36 (.17)^*	.23 (.19)	.21 (.19)	.18 (.18)
Spouses' Employment Status
Employed (SP__E)	.12 (.37)	.06 (.34)	−3.00 (1.88)	−2.67 (1.75)
CR × SP__E	.00 (.43)	.07 (.39)	3.57 (2.16)	3.33 (1.99)
NR × SP__E	−.05 (.53)	−.01 (.49)	1.43 (2.64)	1.74 (2.45)
Contextual Variables
T1 Income Adequacy	.01 (.01)^*	−.02 (.02)
T1 Subjective Health	.17 (.05)^**	−.90 (.25)^***
T1 Marital Quality	.11 (.07)	−.54 (.33)
T1 Personal Control	1.10 (.25)^***	−6.00 (1.23)^***
Income Adequacy Change	.01 (.01)^\	−.02 (.02)
Subjective Health Change	.13 (.05)^**	−.45 (.23)^{\ He didn't hide his feelings. "Lou called me at work and pestered me about coming home early or taking Fridays off," Tyrrell recalls. "I had a career — and I didn't want to leave it." Tyrrell and Puccio could be the poster children for Out-of-Sync Retirement Syndrome: As 76 million boomers march toward what was once a generally agreed-upon "retirement age," many are poorly prepared for the conflicts unleashed when one partner retires and the other continues to toil. "Retirement can magnify preexisting problems in a marriage," says social historian Stephanie Coontz. "The decision to stop work forces you to reevaluate what you both want — and you may discover the gaps are wider than either of you thought." Research shows that marital stress increases during the initial two years of retirement, especially when the husband retires first. "Jobs, like kids, can be buffers in a relationship," Coontz says. "Once the structure of work is gone, unresolved issues rise to the surface." Boomers in particular may struggle with this transition. "In the past, most couples took it for granted that when one of them retired, the other would, too — and they usually faced only the husband's retirement," says sociologist Phyllis Moen, author of Encore Adulthood: Boomers on the Edge of Risk, Renewal, and Purpose. "Two-career boomers are the first generation that has had to deal with his-and-her retirements." Indeed, fewer than 20 percent of all couples quit working in the same year. And a recent study found that 38 percent of retired couples disagree on the lifestyle they want to lead. HOV lane for her, off-ramp for him Complicating the picture is the fact that many 50+ women in the workforce opted for the "mommy track," putting their careers on hold while they raised their families. Then, when their nests emptied, they reentered the workforce with renewed ambition. Today, more than 25 percent of women ages 65 to 69 — and 15.5 percent of women ages 70 to 74 — are employed full time. (The figures for men are 33 percent and 24 percent.) Not only do they enjoy the regular paycheck, they also don't want to lose the intellectual stimulation and social life a job often provides. See also: How to Realign Your Retirement "While husbands may be thinking about volunteering, traveling or having more time as a couple," notes Dorian Mintzer, coauthor of The Couple's Retirement Puzzle, "their wives may be hitting their stride at work. Both spouses are in transition, but they're traveling different roads." Money, money, money More couples might unplug in tandem if their economic views didn't clash. "Even in the best relationships," Mintzer says, "money can stir up intense feelings that complicate the retirement decision." Men and women whose self-esteem hinges on their income may suddenly feel worthless or scared when that paycheck disappears. "What will happen to us the next time the stock market goes crazy?" wonders Tyrrell. "Every day there's another scary headline about boomers outliving their savings." A 72-year-old Massachusetts engineer, who asked not to be named, says he and his wife have "been wrestling with this issue forever. I'm not worried, but my wife — a teacher who's thinking about [retiring] — routinely panics." He retired seven years ago and still can't persuade her to look closely at their cash flow. "Every so often she'll 'bungee' into the conversation, but she'd feel a lot better — and we'd argue a lot less — if she had the complete picture." Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html] 5 (Financial) Things to Consider Before Marrying Later in Life When two people marry later in life, there is more to sort through than just wedding gifts. Marriage between two people with longer histories involves important decisions concerning finances, children, assets, housing, and retirement—to name just a few. Here are five topics you will want to take up with your intended spouse right away to ensure your best financial interests as individuals and as a couple are protected in your new union. Key Takeaways Older couples who plan to marry should discuss issues such as finances, children, assets, housing, and retirement before their wedding. When combining finances, it's best to be open about everything from your degree of indebtedness to investment strategies and retirement plans. Be sure to update your tax information, determine your filing status, and update your name and benefit status with the Social Security Administration (SSA). Complete estate planning to see that your families' financial needs are met after you die, and update beneficiary information for wills, life insurance policies, and the like. Consider creating a prenuptial agreement to ensure that your financial assets are protected in the event of a divorce and to clarify property division when one of you dies. 1. Combining Finances After Marriage Older couples tend to be more set in their respective ways, especially when it comes to money management styles. They've also had more time to accumulate significant assets. This can make it a little harder to merge finances, especially when one partner is a spender and the other is thriftier—or when one partner has considerably more resources than the other. If either partner has young children from a previous relationship, it introduces a whole other set of issues to discuss, such as the payment or receipt of child support and possibly alimony. Even when there are adult children, there are issues of inheritance to clarify. Some smart planning can help you ease this transition. Here is advice from the Financial Planning Association and the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants that you can use, preferably before walking down the aisle: Discuss each other's credit histories by reviewing credit reports and scores together. Determine each partner's indebtedness and comfort level with debt. Reach an agreement about how to share paychecks, savings, and bill payments. Set up one joint banking account and an individual account for each partner. Decide who will be the primary breadwinner or if you will both be contributing more or less equally. Compare investment strategies and styles, such as whether you are aggressive or conservative. Figure out what level of savings you'll want to have as a couple. Discuss what you envision for retirement if you are not yet retired. Talk about where you plan to live—now and in the future. Discuss how you will handle everyday child expenses and school/college tuition for kids from a previous marriage/partnership. Prepare a formal agreement with any ex-spouses about the children. 2. Updating Tax Filing Information The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) advises newlyweds to ensure that the names on their tax returns match the names registered with the Social Security Administration (SSA). If not, any tax refund could be delayed. Also, consider whether it makes more sense financially to file a joint tax return or to file as married filing separately. Make sure each of you straightens out any tax issues with a previous spouse before remarrying. If your spouse dies and you remarry before the end of that tax year, you can file a joint return with your new spouse. 3. Estate Planning with a New Spouse Estate planning is imperative. This organization of your property is a means to see that your families' financial needs and goals are met after you die. Estate planning is especially important when children from previous relationships are involved because it ensures they will receive what is rightfully theirs. Keep in mind that state laws regarding estates vary. Wills Life insurance policies Retirement accounts Investment funds Any other financial accounts Prenuptial agreements Many financial planners, estate planners, and accountants also advise considering prenuptial agreements when you marry or remarry later in life. In a marriage, all assets and income usually become community property, even if they're held in one person’s name. A prenuptial agreement is a written contract (to which both parties voluntarily agree) that outlines the terms and conditions associated with dividing up financial assets and responsibilities if the marriage dissolves. A prenup is especially important if you and your intended have large income or resource disparities. The agreement should be discussed and finalized with a lawyer before the marriage (because state laws don't always recognize postnuptial agreements). The prenuptial agreement can help determine what will be left for each of your respective families to inherit if you divorce or when you die. Generally speaking, a prenup cannot address matters dealt with in divorce agreements, such as child support, visitation rights, or custody. Additionally, because a prenup is a financial tool, it cannot be used for nonfinancial matters. You can’t make your spouse promise to make lasagna every Friday night, for instance. And you can’t use a prenup to designate who will change their name or to make agreements about children. Many of the same details that go into drafting a prenup are required for an estate plan; so, it is a good way to ensure you are providing for your spouse and managing your children’s inheritance at the same time. Trusts and wills A prenup can stop your spouse from challenging your will or any existing trusts. Whether or not a trust is affected will depend on who the beneficiary or beneficiaries are and how the trust was set up, such as whether it was within the context of a divorce agreement or a child support agreement, which could make the trust less flexible. Some trusts, such as a qualified terminable interest property trust (QTIP), offer both support for your spouse after your death and protections for your first family. A QTIP provides income for your spouse but ensures that when your spouse dies, the assets inherited from you will go to the children from your first marriage or other heirs you choose rather than to your spouse's heirs. Finally, AARP advises those marrying later in life to have separate wills rather than a joint will. Having separate wills eases potential complications with the future distribution of property, especially considering that life circumstances can change throughout the years you are married. Make sure to update your respective powers of attorney, including your medical powers of attorney or healthcare proxies. Additionally, you may want to change your beneficiaries for the following items: Wills Life insurance policies Retirement accounts Investment funds Any other financial accounts 4. Updating Info With the Social Security Administration Newlyweds should contact the SSA when a name change occurs to make sure earnings are properly reported. If the marriage occurs after full retirement age, and your Social Security benefit is less than half of your new spouse's, you can receive the Social Security benefit on your record plus an additional amount to bring you up to half of your new spouse's benefit. This will generally occur one year into the marriage. If you are receiving any divorced spousal benefits, generally, those benefits end if you remarry. Widows' or widowers' benefits aren't available to a spouse who remarries before age 60. If you remarry after age 60 (or after 50 if you're disabled), though, you will still receive benefits based on your former spouse's income history. 5. Reviewing Medicaid Benefits Marriage can affect benefits paid by Medicaid, a health benefits program for low-income individuals. Medicaid is based mainly on household income, so a person receiving Medicaid benefits who marries someone with a higher income could lose coverage. Check the eligibility rules for your state to learn how marriage could impact your benefits. The Bottom Line Marriage can affect every aspect of your financial life. Sit down as a couple to learn more about each of your present financial situations and future goals and then talk to an attorney. Consider keeping most assets and property separate to minimize complications, especially when you have heirs. If you didn’t make a prenup but are thinking that it would have been a good idea, you can still create a postnuptial agreement. Though a postnup may be considered less valid than a prenuptial agreement, some legal documentation is better than none. Most importantly of all: Don't end your discussion at the aisle. Maintain ongoing discussions about finances throughout your married life, for richer or poorer. Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html] Retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple - suggest [dagger]\}
Marital Quality Change	.00 (.04)	−.11 (.23)
Personal Control Change	1.04 (.24)^***	−5.47 (1.22)^***
F	28.68^***	18.98^***	15.81^***	24.43^***	16.72^***	14.18^***
df (Model/Residual)	6/271	9/268	17/260	6/271	9/268	17/260
R²/Adjusted R²	.39/.38	.39/.37	.51/.48	.35/.34	.36/.34	.48/.45

Dependent Variables

Morale at Time 2

Depressive Symptoms at Time 2

Independent Variables

Model 1 b (SE)

Model 2 b (SE)

Model 3 b (SE)

Model 1 b (SE)

Model 2 b (SE)

Model 3 b (SE)

Age

.01 (.02)

−.00 (.02)

−.07 (.08)

−.08 (.08)

−.09 (.08)

T1WB

.71 (.14)^***

.72 (.14)^***

.53 (.13)^***

.32 (.15)^*

.36 (.15)^*

.29 (.14)^*

Retirement Status/Transitions

.08 (.22)

.11 (.34)

.21 (.31)

.79 (1.12)

−1.33 (1.69)

−1.55 (1.55)

.33 (.25)

.37 (.40)

.35 (.38)

.01 (1.12)

−1.31 (1.98)

−1.67 (1.92)

Not retired^a

CR × T1WB

−.00 (.15)

−.01 (.15)

−.04 (.14)

.38 (.16)^*

.34 (.16)^*

.22 (.15)

NR × T1WB

−.49 (.18)^**

−.49 (.19)^**

−.36 (.17)^*

.23 (.19)

.21 (.19)

.18 (.18)

Spouses' Employment Status

Employed (SP__E)

.12 (.37)

.06 (.34)

−3.00 (1.88)

−2.67 (1.75)

CR × SP__E

.00 (.43)

.07 (.39)

3.57 (2.16)

3.33 (1.99)

NR × SP__E

−.05 (.53)

−.01 (.49)

1.43 (2.64)

1.74 (2.45)

Contextual Variables

T1 Income Adequacy

.01 (.01)^*

−.02 (.02)

T1 Subjective Health

.17 (.05)^**

−.90 (.25)^***

T1 Marital Quality

.11 (.07)

−.54 (.33)

T1 Personal Control

1.10 (.25)^***

−6.00 (1.23)^***

Income Adequacy Change

.01 (.01)^{\ Coping With the Stress Children Add to a Marriage
Sometimes the addition of kids can lead to marriage problems you may not have expected. It's a common experience: You had a wonderfully romantic relationship—then you add kids to the mix and everything's a little more stressful, less romantic, and less satisfying.
Adding children to the mix will bring a couple closer together, but not always in the ways you might expect. While marriage problems can be common after kids are born, there are steps you can take to protect your relationship.
Challenges of Marriage With Children
The hard truth is that a large proportion of people find that children create a significant amount of stress in their relationship, particularly when the kids are young.
According to researcher Matthew Johnson of Binghamton University in his book, Great Myths of Intimate Relationships: Dating, Sex, and Marriage, research shows that this is commonplace. There is also a decrease in relationship satisfaction following the birth of the first child.
This dip in happiness doesn't go away until after children leave the nest, and by that time, many couples have divorced or drifted apart. Here are some more specifics:
Children add stress to a marriage and marital satisfaction decreases sharply when kids become part of the relationship. Interestingly, this also happens to unmarried couples, so marriage itself is not the culprit in relationships that go stale.
Children create stress for parents as individuals, as well as the couple as a unit. Perhaps not surprisingly, mothers take on the lion's share of childcare in most relationships. Also not surprisingly, this stress hits mothers in particular pretty hard. Most women's other relationships deteriorate to a degree as their bond with their children grows stronger.
The stress of children is universal. It's not isolated to certain social classes or even to specific countries or regions of the world.
Top Relationship Stressors for Parents
There are many factors that go into this dip in satisfaction, and they are not the same for everyone. However, certain stressors are particularly taxing on a relationship and an individual. The following stressors are particularly challenging.
Less Time Together
Because of the intensive caretaking required and the fact that any alone time that occurs during the baby's waking hours requires the use of a sitter, couples naturally find themselves with less time to spend together. They usually have less energy to devote to one another when they do find the time as well.
When couples have a child, they are often surprised by the amount of work it takes to raise a baby, and the toddler years are labor-intensive as well.
This can obviously take a toll on the connection they feel as they're less free to spontaneously have fun, or enjoy leisurely days together, even on the weekends.
Less Time Solo
Having kids often means that parents have less time to spend on themselves. This can mean less time for things like travel and hobbies, but also for basic self-care including fitness and relaxation.
When parents have too little sleep and too little time to take care of their own needs (as often happens with a new baby or a high-needs toddler), they can become more stressed and difficult to be around. When one or both partners are not functioning at their best, particularly if this lasts for a prolonged amount of time, it can take a toll on the relationship.
More Demands on the Partnership
When a child enters the relationship, couples need to divide up responsibilities in caretaking, even if both agree that the bulk of the work should fall on the shoulders of one parent while the other focuses more on earning money.
This can lead to a feeling that the couple is more of a functional partnership than a romantic partnership as couples begin to feel a little more like roommates than soulmates. Because of these additional demands and the negotiation that's needed, there's a greater chance of conflict.
Additionally, when partners have different responsibilities, it's possible for one or the other to feel resentful if they feel they're working harder; without a frame of reference for what the other partner is dealing with, it's easier for new parents to feel that they should be handling things differently and feel frustrated as a result.
Special Circumstances
Not everyone experiences the following challenges, but they can put a particular strain on a family. These are special circumstances that create significant additional stress:
A child with a high-needs temperament
A family member with health challenges, including physical and mental health issues
Extreme financial strain
A lack of practical support from friends, family, or neighbors who can offer assistance
What Children Add to a Marriage
The good news is that, although some studies show that marital satisfaction doesn't rise significantly until children leave the nest, having children is worth the effort in other ways.
Children enhance our altruism: Other research shows that giving to others and expressing altruism is beneficial for our overall wellbeing, and having children certainly provides opportunities to give of ourselves.
Children reduce the likelihood of divorce: While new parents may feel less happy, they are also less likely to divorce following children. This may be because they are more motivated to keep their partnership together for the sake of their children, but the increased commitment can help them weather the challenges they face and maintain their connection until happier times return.
Parents themselves say it's worth it: While these challenges can be difficult for a couple to face, virtually all parents say the sacrifices they make are worth it and they couldn't (or wouldn't want to) imagine their lives without their kids. They say their children bring their life meaning. This can bring significant benefits as research shows that those who have meaning in their lives tend to be happier.
Coping With Post-Kids Marriage Problems
If you're feeling stressed or that there is some strain on your relationship, you're not alone and you're not necessarily doing something wrong. There are many things you can and should do to safeguard your own happiness and your connection to your partner.
Managing the stress you face as parents can help you to preserve the happiness you've had, and to build more positive feelings and experiences from here on.
While these things may be difficult to do, especially when you feel burdened with responsibility, they are worth it. After all, marriage problems in themselves are a burden so taking these steps may help alleviate them.
Find Social Support
Your partner isn't the only one who can help you to increase your relationship bliss. Family members, friends, and even people you hire can help you to stress less and enjoy your time together more. Here are some ideas to keep things happier.
Spend time with your partner and do things together without your children.
Get support from people like friends, parents, family members, or neighbors.
Create an emotional support system where you can talk about difficult aspects of parenting and marriage.
Find ways to minimize social stress, such as competitive parents, unsolicited advice, or your own tendency for social comparison.
Practice Self Care
It is important for you to take care of yourself and your own needs, and not just those of your children. It's important to keep your body in good health so you have the physical and emotional stamina to do what needs to be done.
Make sure you're getting enough sleep, even if it means asking someone to watch your kids so you can take a nap.
Eat balanced, nutritious meals.
Find some time for yourself whenever possible. Set aside time to do nothing if you can, but even running errands alone can help.
Spend time pursuing hobbies or interests that you love, even if it's only for a few minutes each day.
Work on Maintaining Balance
There is a lot of talk about "balance," but that is because it is so important for stress management. That means maintaining a balance in all areas: balancing work with play, balancing meeting your needs with your kids' needs and your partner's needs, balancing time spent away from home and time spent with family, and other balances. Here are some important forms of balance to focus on.
Create a balance of kids’ activities, your activities, downtime, and sleep time.
Do enough fun things to create memories, but not so many that you feel overwhelmed—be honest with yourself about where you stand.
Eliminate tolerations when possible, find help when possible, and be present when possible.
Focus on Your Frame of Mind
The way you look at things can greatly affect your relationship and your overall happiness. In this case, there are many ways that you can focus on maintaining the right frame of mind. Any of the following can raise your level of relationship satisfaction.
Remember that difficult moments are temporary and will eventually pass.
Savor the positive experiences.
Focus on gratitude.
Focus on what you are learning from your kids and all the ways in which they enrich your life.
Know that a decrease in marital satisfaction is normal—and not your or your mate’s fault—but that there are many things you can do to increase satisfaction as well.
Maintain a regular date night.
Find the humor in the challenges.
Be patient with yourself, your partner, and your kids.
Have fun as a family.
Maintain friendships with other families and stay close with your family (if these relationships are healthy).
It is also important to get help if you need it. This help may take the form of a marriage counselor, an individual therapist, or even just a babysitter who can help take some of the pressure off and allow you to be your old selves again.
A Word From Verywell
Remind yourself that there may be sacrifices, but it's worth the effort. Savoring your good times with your partner and children is the best way to be sure the challenges and stresses don't weigh down your relationship. In the end, your relationship and your life are what you make of them.
Thanks for your feedback!
Verywell Mind uses only high-quality sources, including peer-reviewed studies, to support the facts within our articles. Read our editorial process to learn more about how we fact-check and keep our content accurate, reliable, and trustworthy.
Johnson MD. Great myths of intimate relationships: Dating, sex, and marriage. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell; 2016.
Twenge JM, Campbell WK, Foster CA. Parenthood and marital satisfaction: A meta‐analytic review. J Marriage Fam. 2003;65:574-583. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2003.00574.x
Johansson M, Svensson I, Stenström U, Massoudi P. Depressive symptoms and parental stress in mothers and fathers 25 months after birth. J Child Health Care. 2017;21(1):65–73. doi:10.1177/1367493516679015
Dillon LM, Beechler MP. Marital satisfaction and the impact of children in collectivist cultures: A meta-analysis. J Evol Psychol. 2010;8(1):7-22. doi:10.1556/JEP.8.2010.1.3
Dew J, Wilcox W. If momma ain't happy: Explaining declines in marital satisfaction among new mothers. J Marriage Fam. 2011;73(1):1-12. doi:10.2307/29789551
Medina AM, Lederhos CL, Lillis TA. Sleep disruption and decline in marital satisfaction across the transition to parenthood. Fam Syst Health. 2009;27(2):153–160. doi:10.1037/a0015762
Newkirk K, Perry-Jenkins M, Sayer AG. Division of household and childcare labor and relationship conflict among low-income new parents. Sex Roles. 2017;76(5):319–333. doi:10.1007/s11199-016-0604-3
Gorchoff SM, John OP, Helson R. Contextualizing change in marital satisfaction during middle age: an 18-year longitudinal study. Psychol Sci. 2008;19(11):1194–1200. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02222.x
Post SG. It's good to be good: science says it's so. Research demonstrates that people who help others usually have healthier, happier lives. Health Prog. 2009;90(4):18–25.
Xu Q, Yu J, Qiu Z. The impact of children on divorce risk. J Chin Sociol. 2015;2(1). doi:10.1186/s40711-015-0003-0
Medvedev ON, Landhuis CE. Exploring constructs of well-being, happiness and quality of life. PeerJ. 2018;6:e4903. doi:10.7717/peerj.4903
Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html]
He didn't hide his feelings. "Lou called me at work and pestered me about coming home early or taking Fridays off," Tyrrell recalls. "I had a career — and I didn't want to leave it."
Tyrrell and Puccio could be the poster children for Out-of-Sync Retirement Syndrome: As 76 million boomers march toward what was once a generally agreed-upon "retirement age," many are poorly prepared for the conflicts unleashed when one partner retires and the other continues to toil. "Retirement can magnify preexisting problems in a marriage," says social historian Stephanie Coontz. "The decision to stop work forces you to reevaluate what you both want — and you may discover the gaps are wider than either of you thought."
Research shows that marital stress increases during the initial two years of retirement, especially when the husband retires first. "Jobs, like kids, can be buffers in a relationship," Coontz says. "Once the structure of work is gone, unresolved issues rise to the surface."
Boomers in particular may struggle with this transition. "In the past, most couples took it for granted that when one of them retired, the other would, too — and they usually faced only the husband's retirement," says sociologist Phyllis Moen, author of Encore Adulthood: Boomers on the Edge of Risk, Renewal, and Purpose. "Two-career boomers are the first generation that has had to deal with his-and-her retirements."
Indeed, fewer than 20 percent of all couples quit working in the same year. And a recent study found that 38 percent of retired couples disagree on the lifestyle they want to lead.
HOV lane for her, off-ramp for him
Complicating the picture is the fact that many 50+ women in the workforce opted for the "mommy track," putting their careers on hold while they raised their families. Then, when their nests emptied, they reentered the workforce with renewed ambition. Today, more than 25 percent of women ages 65 to 69 — and 15.5 percent of women ages 70 to 74 — are employed full time. (The figures for men are 33 percent and 24 percent.) Not only do they enjoy the regular paycheck, they also don't want to lose the intellectual stimulation and social life a job often provides.
See also: How to Realign Your Retirement
"While husbands may be thinking about volunteering, traveling or having more time as a couple," notes Dorian Mintzer, coauthor of The Couple's Retirement Puzzle, "their wives may be hitting their stride at work. Both spouses are in transition, but they're traveling different roads."
Money, money, money
More couples might unplug in tandem if their economic views didn't clash. "Even in the best relationships," Mintzer says, "money can stir up intense feelings that complicate the retirement decision." Men and women whose self-esteem hinges on their income may suddenly feel worthless or scared when that paycheck disappears. "What will happen to us the next time the stock market goes crazy?" wonders Tyrrell. "Every day there's another scary headline about boomers outliving their savings."
A 72-year-old Massachusetts engineer, who asked not to be named, says he and his wife have "been wrestling with this issue forever. I'm not worried, but my wife — a teacher who's thinking about [retiring] — routinely panics." He retired seven years ago and still can't persuade her to look closely at their cash flow. "Every so often she'll 'bungee' into the conversation, but she'd feel a lot better — and we'd argue a lot less — if she had the complete picture."
Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html]
Financial Benefits of Marriage vs. Being Single – What’s Better?
Each year, about 2 million Americans get married, according to figures from the National Center for Health Statistics. No doubt all those newlyweds — or at least most of them — believe tying the knot will make them happier. What they might not think about is whether it could also make them wealthier.
A 2005 study from The Ohio State University (OSU) found that people saw a sharp increase in their level of wealth after getting married. After 10 years of marriage, the couples reported an average net worth of around $43,000 compared to $11,000 for people who had stayed single.
However, people who had married and then divorced were worse off than any other group. After a divorce, the average man was left with $8,500 in assets, while the average divorced woman had only $3,400.
As this study shows, getting married has risks as well as benefits. Furthermore, many factors play a role in how marriage affects your finances. The benefits of marriage vary based on your income, your living situation, and (most of all) whether you have children.

Motley Fool Stock Advisor recommendations have an average return of 618%. For $79 (or just $1.52 per week), join more than 1 million members and don't miss their upcoming stock picks. 30 day money-back guarantee. Sign Up Now
As a result, it’s impossible to say that married people are always financially better off than single people or vice versa. What is possible is to examine the financial pluses and minuses of marriage and figure out how they might affect you, either now or in the future.
Costs and Benefits of Marriage
The OSU study doesn’t explore the reasons married couples can sock away more money, but the author, Jay Zagorsky, suggests several possibilities.
Married couples can save money by sharing household expenses and duties. Additionally, couples enjoy many benefits single people don’t when it comes to insurance, retirement, and taxes.
But being married carries some financial costs as well. For example, weddings are a significant expense for many couples. Also, the tax laws that benefit some couples result in a penalty for others. And finally, there’s always the risk a marriage will end in divorce, which is one of the biggest financial setbacks you can suffer.
Wedding Debt
Many couples start married life with a substantial one-time expense: a big wedding. According to a 2021 LendEDU survey, the average wedding in the United States costs over $10,000. A 2019 survey by The Knot came up with an even higher average: nearly $30,000. Either way, it’s a lot to spend on a one-day event.
More troubling still is that many couples go into debt to pay for their big day. About 1 in 3 couples in the LendEDU survey borrowed money for wedding costs. These couples spent more — close to $18,000, on average — and borrowed nearly two-thirds of that.
That’s a big problem for both their finances and their future happiness. A 2012 study by the New Economics Foundation shows that people who have credit card debt are generally unhappier, and unmanageable debt can lead to mental problems like anxiety and depression.
The Marriage Penalty
After the honeymoon is over, married couples come home and settle into a new routine together. One of the changes many newlyweds have to adjust to is filing a joint tax return. And in certain cases, that means dealing with the marriage penalty.
The marriage penalty exists because tax brackets — the income levels at which tax rates shift — aren’t always exactly twice as high for couples as they are for single people. As a result, couples who file their taxes jointly sometimes pay more than they would as two single people.
The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 eliminated the marriage penalty for most Americans. However, it can still apply to couples making over $622,050 per year. They pay a higher percentage of that income in taxes than a single person making $311,000.
But even high-income couples don’t always pay this penalty. If one spouse earns all or most of the income, the couple may get a “marriage bonus” instead. In other words, they pay less in taxes for their joint income than they would individually.
Ironically, very low-income couples can also face a marriage penalty. That’s because people who qualify for the earned income tax credit (EITC) get less money back when they file a joint return.
In 2020, a childless couple with a combined income of $17,000 would get only $359 from the EITC. By contrast, two single people making $8,500 would each get $538. Getting married would cost this low-income couple $717 — about 4% of their total income.
Other Tax Issues
Leaving the marriage penalty aside, married couples definitely get some tax perks that aren’t available to single people. These include:
Extra Deductions. Even if your income doesn’t double after marriage, your income tax deductions can. The standard deduction the IRS allows for couples is exactly twice as high as the deduction for single people. These doubled deductions effectively give a bonus to couples with one nonworking spouse who wouldn’t file a tax return otherwise. They get to take a deduction for both spouses rather than just the one who’s working.
Estate Taxes. If you leave behind a substantial estate when you die — “substantial” meaning $11.7 million or more in 2021 — the government skims an estate tax off before the money passes to your heirs. But any money you leave directly to your legal spouse is exempt from this tax. If you have $20 million and leave it all to your spouse, the government can’t touch a penny of it.
Gift Taxes. Some people try to get around the estate tax by giving large sums of cash to relatives before they die. To close this loophole, the IRS charges a gift tax on any gifts of $15,000 or more. However, like the estate tax, this tax doesn’t apply to your spouse. You can give your spouse any sum of money — or other valuable items, such as jewelry — without paying tax on it.
Home Sales. When you sell your home, you don’t have to pay capital gains tax on the first $250,000 of profit if you’re single. But if you’re married, and you and your spouse have both lived in the house for at least two of the last five years, this exemption doubles. That means you can make $500,000 on the sale of your home and pay no tax at all.
Health Benefits
Married couples often have more choices for health insurance coverage. If employers of both spouses provide health plans, they can each keep their own workplace coverage or they can both join one spouse’s plan. That gives them more options to choose the doctors they prefer or save money on premiums.
If one spouse doesn’t have health coverage from work, health benefits are even more critical. Getting married makes it possible for the uninsured spouse to get coverage through the other spouse’s employer. That’s usually more affordable than paying for an individual policy.
Retirement Benefits
Married couples have more options when it comes to retirement benefits as well. These include:
IRA Contributions. If you’re single and unemployed, you can’t contribute to an individual retirement account (IRA). However, if you’re a stay-at-home spouse, you can set up a spousal IRA and contribute from your joint income.
Inherited Benefits. In many cases, if you inherit another person’s Roth IRA, you must start making withdrawals from it promptly. But if you inherit your spouse’s Roth IRA, you have the option to transfer it to a Roth IRA in your own name and make no withdrawals until you retire.
Social Security. Married couples have many more options for collecting Social Security benefits. You can either collect your own benefits or take a payment equal to 50% of your spouse’s benefit — even if that’s more than you’d be entitled to on your own. You can also choose to delay your own benefits to increase the payout and take the spousal benefit in the meantime. Even a nonworking spouse who has never contributed to Social Security at all can still collect spousal benefits.
The Risk of Divorce
Perhaps the greatest financial risk of getting married is the possibility of ending up divorced. While being married is generally better for your wallet than being single, getting a divorce cancels that benefit — and then some.
The OSU study shows that on average, divorced people have 77% less wealth than single people in the same age group.
Interestingly, the drop in a couple’s fortunes doesn’t happen immediately after the divorce. In fact, the couple’s wealth usually starts to decline about four years before they end the marriage.
Zagorsky, the author of the study, says that could happen because many couples separate before they officially divorce, taking on the additional cost of maintaining separate households. Another possibility is that the stress of a failing marriage hurts each spouse’s ability to work and earn money.
The impact of divorce continues long after a couple splits up. The newly single people see their wealth start to creep upward again within a year, but it doesn’t increase very fast. Even 10 years after a divorce, their median wealth is still below $10,000 — less than the $11,000 average for people who stayed single.
The Role of Parenthood
Bringing up children is a huge expense. The 2017 U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Expenditures on Children by Families report shows that a family with a child born in 2015 can expect to spend more than $233,000 raising that child to adulthood.
Decades ago, this cost seldom affected single people. An analysis by the Pew Research Center shows that in 1968, only 7% of parents living with a child were unmarried. By 2017, 1 in 4 parents living with children was single, and 1 in 4 children lived with just one parent.
And in 2019, 40% of all babies were born to single parents, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Vital Statistics Report.
Having children is a financial game-changer for both single and married people. Child care and increased housing costs eat up a large share of any parent’s income.
However, there’s no doubt that raising kids is easier with two people to share the burden. Not only do couples tend to have higher incomes, but they also have more choices for dealing with child care.
Child Care Costs
A 2021 survey by Care.com found that more than half of all families spent over $10,000 on child care in 2020. For a family with two children in day care, the average cost is $640 per week — over $30,000 per year. More than 85% of parents say they spend at least 10% of their income on child care.
However, for many married couples, there are ways of avoiding this cost. Couples have options that aren’t available to most single parents, such as:
Stay-at-Home Parenting. Some parents avoid child care costs by having one spouse quit working at least for a year or so to care for the children full-time. Mothers are more likely than fathers to take on this role. A 2018 Pew study found that in 2016, 27% of all mothers were stay-at-home moms and 7% of fathers were stay-at-home dads.
Work-at-Home Parenting. New technologies, such as email and teleconferencing, make it possible for some parents to work from home. Although this job arrangement is sometimes possible for single parents, couples with two jobs have double the chance of making it work. It’s also easier when the other parent has a full-time job since many work-at-home opportunities are freelance, and freelance jobs often have unpredictable income and no benefits.
Split-Shift Parenting. Some parents choose to adjust their schedules so one of them is always at home with the kids. For example, one parent works the overnight shift and returns home before the other leaves for work in the morning. Split-shift parenting means both parents get to spend time with their children, but it leaves them very little time to spend with each other, which can strain the marriage.
Housing Costs
According to the USDA report, housing costs are the single most significant factor in the cost of raising a child. For married, middle-income parents, nearly 30% of the money spent on a first child goes toward increased housing costs. Child care and education account for only 16%.
Part of the reason for this is that a bigger family simply needs more space. A family with two children needs at least two bedrooms, preferably three, while a single person or a couple with no children can get by with one.
However, parents also tend to pay more for housing because they want their kids to go to the best schools, and homes in these school districts tend to be expensive.
Every year, the education review website Niche names the top school districts in the country. It also provides links to nearby homes for each district. In 7 of the top 10 districts for 2022, a three-bedroom home costs at least $380,000. By contrast, Zillow puts the typical home price for the whole country at just over $308,000.
Fortunately, there are some exceptions to this rule. For instance, the top school district on Niche’s list is in Lincolnshire, Illinois, where three-bedroom homes start at around $290,000. And in No. 4 Vernon, Illinois, they can go for under $170,000.
Websites like Finder and 24WallSt have identified affordable neighborhoods with good schools throughout the U.S. Choosing a home in one of these neighborhoods can help parents keep their housing costs in check while still giving their children an excellent education.
Tax Breaks for Parents
Because raising children is so expensive, the IRS provides an array of tax breaks for parents to help offset the cost. These include:
The Child Tax Credit. This credit reduces parents’ taxes by up to $2,000 per child. Married couples with combined incomes up to $400,000 can take the full amount. So can single parents with incomes up to $200,000, regardless of whether they file as single, head of household, or qualifying widow or widower. Above these income levels, the credit gradually shrinks. Since the amount for a couple is twice the amount for an individual, this perk is exactly as good for single or married parents.
The Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit. Parents who have to pay for child care can deduct a portion of these costs through the child and dependent care tax credit. This credit provides up to $3,000 for the care of a child under 13 and up to $6,000 for two or more. There’s no income limit for this tax credit, but the percentage of your costs you get back is lower for higher incomes. It starts at 35% for incomes up to $15,000 and gradually drops down to 20% for incomes of $43,000 or more, no matter your filing status. That means a single parent with a $30,000 income who pays $10,000 per year for day care, could get back 27% of that amount, or $2,700. By contrast, a married couple with a $60,000 income and the same day care expenses would get back only 20% of the cost, or $2,000 — just $1,000 per person.
Flexible Spending Accounts. Parents can also offset their child care costs by using a flexible spending account (FSA) if their employer offers one. With an FSA, a parent can set aside up to $5,000 in pretax dollars for child care. It’s an alternative to taking the child and dependent care tax credit in most cases. However, parents who have two or more children and child care expenses of more than $5,000 per year can do both. They can set aside $5,000 in an FSA and claim a tax credit for up to $1,000 in costs over that amount.
Having a child also increases the amount you can get from the earned income tax credit. The maximum credit for people with no children is $1,502 for tax year 2021. However, this amount jumps to $3,618 for people with one child and maxes out at $6,728 for parents with three kids or more. These numbers are the same for single and married parents.
Having kids makes it easier to qualify for the EITC as well. A single person with no children needs an income of $21,430 or less to qualify, but a single person with one child can qualify with up to $42,158 in income. For a married couple, the limits are $27,380 with no kids and $48,108 with one. Additional children increase these limits still more.
The IRS’s EITC Assistant shows how the EITC differs for single parents and married ones. For the tax year 2020, a married couple with two children at home and an adjusted gross income (AGI) of $40,000 would get $2,802 from the EITC — just $1,401 per person.
By contrast, a single person with two children at home and an AGI of $20,000, filing as head of household, would get $5,774. So this is a case where the marriage penalty deals a big blow to married couples.
Tax Filing Status
Most tax credits are available both for couples who file joint returns and single parents who file as head of household. Parents who file as head of household have lower tax rates than other single people, and they can also take a higher standard deduction. Compared to married couples, they pay more in taxes for the same amount of income, but they still end up paying less per person.
For example, suppose a head of household earns $60,000 per year and takes the standard deduction, the child tax credit, and $2,000 from the child and dependent care tax credit. After these deductions and credits, this person would owe $660 in taxes on that income.
A married couple with the same $60,000 in income between them using the same deductions and credits would pay no tax at all. However, a married couple where each spouse earned $60,000 for a combined income of $120,000 would pay $8,375, more than 10 times as much as the single head of household.
In short, this is a case in which single parents get a much-needed break.
Sharing a Home
OSU study author Zagorsky speculated that the reason married couples save more than single people could be that they’re more likely to share a household. By sharing expenses such as rent, food, and utilities, they can spend less than two single people who live alone.
The annual Consumer Expenditure Survey conducted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics supports this theory. It shows that the average single person spends $45,701 per year, while the average two-income couple spends $78,249. By combining their expenses, the couple saves $13,153 each year.
However, these benefits aren’t just for married couples. Single people can get them by sharing a home with a roommate, a family member, or a significant other. Sharing a household is one of the best ways for single people to close the wealth gap and start saving early for big expenses down the road.
Shared Expenses
According to an old saying, “Two can live as cheaply as one.” That’s not exactly accurate, but it’s definitely true that two people living together and sharing all their expenses can live more cheaply than two people maintaining separate households.
Housing costs are a good example. Suppose two people live in identical one-bedroom apartments, each paying $1,620 per month — roughly the national average, according to Rent.com. If they move in together and share just one of these apartments, they immediately cut their rent in half.
Even if they upgrade to a two-bedroom apartment to give themselves more space, they can still cut their total housing bill by a sizable amount. The average monthly rent for a two-bedroom apartment is only about $1,880, so they’d still cut their costs by about 42%.
People sharing a household can save on all sorts of other expenses as well. It’s easier for them to buy groceries in bulk — for instance, getting a gallon of milk instead of a half-gallon without worrying it’ll go bad before they finish it. They can share one landline phone bill, combine their home insurance policies, and share loads at the coin laundry.
All these savings can add up to thousands of dollars each year.
Shared Responsibilities
People who live alone also have to do all the work of maintaining the home by themselves. Keeping up with household tasks like cleaning, cooking, and laundry can feel overwhelming.
After a while, it’s tempting to hire someone else to take care of it — and that can get expensive. According to Angi (formerly Angie’s List), the average cost of a house cleaning is around $170. Getting one every two weeks would come to $4,420 per year.
By contrast, living with a partner or a roommate can ease the burden on both of you. If one person cooks dinner, the other can do the dishes. If one does the laundry, the other can clean the bathroom. Since cooking or cleaning for two people doesn’t take much longer than doing it for one, that cuts way down on the amount of time these chores take.
People who live alone also spend more in less obvious ways. For instance, when you’re going through a crunch at work, you often get home late and don’t have the time or energy to cook. If you share your home, you can ask your partner or your roommate to take over the cooking until your work crisis is over.
But if you live alone and don’t have this option, you’re more likely to end up eating out at restaurants every night. Eating out costs a lot more than cooking at home — anywhere from $5 for a burger and fries at McDonald’s to $100 or more at a French bistro.
Alternatively, you might turn to convenience foods from the grocery store, such as frozen dinners, to get you through your busy period. These are cheaper than a restaurant meal, but they’re still far more expensive than cooking from scratch.
Final Word
There’s no doubt marriage offers some advantages compared to being single. However, both financially and emotionally, it’s much better to stay single than to marry the wrong person. Marrying someone who doesn’t share your values and goals is a good recipe for a bumpy marriage and a painful and expensive divorce.
So if you’re single now but plan to marry someday, the most important thing you can do is choose your partner carefully. Ensure you understand and agree with each other’s financial goals so you’re working together and not against each other.
And if you’re already married, it’s not too late to have this conversation. By taking the time to talk about your financial needs and goals, you can keep your marriage and finances strong.
Stock Advisor
Motley Fool Stock Advisor recommendations have an average return of 618%. For $79 (or just $1.52 per week), join more than 1 million members and don't miss their upcoming stock picks. 30 day money-back guarantee.
Sign Up
Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html]
5 (Financial) Things to Consider Before Marrying Later in Life
When two people marry later in life, there is more to sort through than just wedding gifts. Marriage between two people with longer histories involves important decisions concerning finances, children, assets, housing, and retirement—to name just a few. Here are five topics you will want to take up with your intended spouse right away to ensure your best financial interests as individuals and as a couple are protected in your new union.
Key Takeaways
Older couples who plan to marry should discuss issues such as finances, children, assets, housing, and retirement before their wedding.
When combining finances, it's best to be open about everything from your degree of indebtedness to investment strategies and retirement plans.
Be sure to update your tax information, determine your filing status, and update your name and benefit status with the Social Security Administration (SSA).
Complete estate planning to see that your families' financial needs are met after you die, and update beneficiary information for wills, life insurance policies, and the like.
Consider creating a prenuptial agreement to ensure that your financial assets are protected in the event of a divorce and to clarify property division when one of you dies.
1. Combining Finances After Marriage
Older couples tend to be more set in their respective ways, especially when it comes to money management styles. They've also had more time to accumulate significant assets. This can make it a little harder to merge finances, especially when one partner is a spender and the other is thriftier—or when one partner has considerably more resources than the other.
If either partner has young children from a previous relationship, it introduces a whole other set of issues to discuss, such as the payment or receipt of child support and possibly alimony. Even when there are adult children, there are issues of inheritance to clarify.
Some smart planning can help you ease this transition. Here is advice from the Financial Planning Association and the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants that you can use, preferably before walking down the aisle:
Discuss each other's credit histories by reviewing credit reports and scores together.
Determine each partner's indebtedness and comfort level with debt.
Reach an agreement about how to share paychecks, savings, and bill payments.
Set up one joint banking account and an individual account for each partner.
Decide who will be the primary breadwinner or if you will both be contributing more or less equally.
Compare investment strategies and styles, such as whether you are aggressive or conservative.
Figure out what level of savings you'll want to have as a couple.
Discuss what you envision for retirement if you are not yet retired.
Talk about where you plan to live—now and in the future.
Discuss how you will handle everyday child expenses and school/college tuition for kids from a previous marriage/partnership.
Prepare a formal agreement with any ex-spouses about the children.
2. Updating Tax Filing Information
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) advises newlyweds to ensure that the names on their tax returns match the names registered with the Social Security Administration (SSA). If not, any tax refund could be delayed.
Also, consider whether it makes more sense financially to file a joint tax return or to file as married filing separately. Make sure each of you straightens out any tax issues with a previous spouse before remarrying. If your spouse dies and you remarry before the end of that tax year, you can file a joint return with your new spouse.
3. Estate Planning with a New Spouse
Estate planning is imperative. This organization of your property is a means to see that your families' financial needs and goals are met after you die. Estate planning is especially important when children from previous relationships are involved because it ensures they will receive what is rightfully theirs. Keep in mind that state laws regarding estates vary.
Wills
Life insurance policies
Retirement accounts
Investment funds
Any other financial accounts
Prenuptial agreements
Many financial planners, estate planners, and accountants also advise considering prenuptial agreements when you marry or remarry later in life. In a marriage, all assets and income usually become community property, even if they're held in one person’s name. A prenuptial agreement is a written contract (to which both parties voluntarily agree) that outlines the terms and conditions associated with dividing up financial assets and responsibilities if the marriage dissolves. A prenup is especially important if you and your intended have large income or resource disparities.
The agreement should be discussed and finalized with a lawyer before the marriage (because state laws don't always recognize postnuptial agreements). The prenuptial agreement can help determine what will be left for each of your respective families to inherit if you divorce or when you die.
Generally speaking, a prenup cannot address matters dealt with in divorce agreements, such as child support, visitation rights, or custody. Additionally, because a prenup is a financial tool, it cannot be used for nonfinancial matters. You can’t make your spouse promise to make lasagna every Friday night, for instance. And you can’t use a prenup to designate who will change their name or to make agreements about children.
Many of the same details that go into drafting a prenup are required for an estate plan; so, it is a good way to ensure you are providing for your spouse and managing your children’s inheritance at the same time.
Trusts and wills
A prenup can stop your spouse from challenging your will or any existing trusts. Whether or not a trust is affected will depend on who the beneficiary or beneficiaries are and how the trust was set up, such as whether it was within the context of a divorce agreement or a child support agreement, which could make the trust less flexible.
Some trusts, such as a qualified terminable interest property trust (QTIP), offer both support for your spouse after your death and protections for your first family. A QTIP provides income for your spouse but ensures that when your spouse dies, the assets inherited from you will go to the children from your first marriage or other heirs you choose rather than to your spouse's heirs.
Finally, AARP advises those marrying later in life to have separate wills rather than a joint will. Having separate wills eases potential complications with the future distribution of property, especially considering that life circumstances can change throughout the years you are married.
Make sure to update your respective powers of attorney, including your medical powers of attorney or healthcare proxies. Additionally, you may want to change your beneficiaries for the following items:
Wills
Life insurance policies
Retirement accounts
Investment funds
Any other financial accounts
4. Updating Info With the Social Security Administration
Newlyweds should contact the SSA when a name change occurs to make sure earnings are properly reported. If the marriage occurs after full retirement age, and your Social Security benefit is less than half of your new spouse's, you can receive the Social Security benefit on your record plus an additional amount to bring you up to half of your new spouse's benefit. This will generally occur one year into the marriage.
If you are receiving any divorced spousal benefits, generally, those benefits end if you remarry.
Widows' or widowers' benefits aren't available to a spouse who remarries before age 60. If you remarry after age 60 (or after 50 if you're disabled), though, you will still receive benefits based on your former spouse's income history.
5. Reviewing Medicaid Benefits
Marriage can affect benefits paid by Medicaid, a health benefits program for low-income individuals. Medicaid is based mainly on household income, so a person receiving Medicaid benefits who marries someone with a higher income could lose coverage. Check the eligibility rules for your state to learn how marriage could impact your benefits.
The Bottom Line
Marriage can affect every aspect of your financial life. Sit down as a couple to learn more about each of your present financial situations and future goals and then talk to an attorney. Consider keeping most assets and property separate to minimize complications, especially when you have heirs.
If you didn’t make a prenup but are thinking that it would have been a good idea, you can still create a postnuptial agreement. Though a postnup may be considered less valid than a prenuptial agreement, some legal documentation is better than none.
Most importantly of all: Don't end your discussion at the aisle. Maintain ongoing discussions about finances throughout your married life, for richer or poorer.
Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html]
Retirement Transitions, Gender, and Psychological Well-Being: A Life-Course, Ecological Model
Abstract
This longitudinal study investigated the relationship between retirement transitions and subsequent psychological well-being using data on 458 married men and women (aged 50–72 years) who were either still in their primary career jobs, retired, or had just made the transition to retirement over the preceding 2 years. The findings show that the relationship between retirement and psychological well-being must be viewed in a temporal, life course context. Specifically, making the transition to retirement within the last 2 years is associated with higher levels of morale for men, whereas being "continuously" retired is related to greater depressive symptoms among men. The results suggest the importance of examining various resources and contexts surrounding retirement transitions (gender, prior level of psychological well-being, spouses' circumstance, and changes in personal control, marital quality, subjective health, and income adequacy) to understand the dynamics of the retirement transition and its relationship with psychological well-being.
Decision Editor: Margie E. Lachman, PhD
Although retirement has been considered one of the most important later life status transitions (Szinovacz 1980), our knowledge of its psychological consequences is fragmentary. For most older persons, retiring from their primary career jobs is a milestone, marking passage into the later stages of adulthood. It is not simply an objective life course transition, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple, but is also a subjective developmental and social–psychological transformation that may be related to physical and psychological well-being (Moen 2001). On the one hand, the retirement experience may promote a sense of well-being, as workers move out of demanding and/or stressful career jobs. On the other hand, the retirement passage itself may lead to diminished well-being, as individuals lose their occupational attachments, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple, their social network of coworkers, and a major anchor for their identities.
The empirical evidence thus far is inconsistent. Some researchers have identified a significant negative association between retirement and life satisfaction or morale (Elwell and Maltbie-Crannell 1981; Walker, Kimmel, and Price 1981) and a positive association with psychological distress (Bosse, Aldwin, Levenson, and Ekerdt 1987; Bosse, Aldwin, Levenson, and Workman-Daniels 1990). Other researchers have found no deleterious psychological effects associated with retirement, reporting mixed findings or no relationship between retirement and life satisfaction (Gall, Evans, and Howard 1997; Lee 1978; Palmore, Fillenbaum, and George 1984; Stull 1988) or physical health (Palmore et al. 1984), no relationship between retirement and psychological distress (Ross and Drentea 1998; Wright 1990), and even a positive effect of retirement on health or reduced stress level (e.g., Ekerdt, Bosse, and LoCastro 1983; Kasl 1980; Midanik, Soghikian, Ransom, and Tekawa 1995).
Earlier studies suffer from two general weaknesses. First, many focused almost exclusively on men's retirement, with little investigation of women's experiences or the fact that couples are increasingly undergoing two retirements: his and hers. Recent demographic trends—including increases in women's workforce participation, along with increased longevity and decreased retirement age—point to the importance of considering retirement as a "couple phenomenon" (see Henretta, Retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple, and Chan 1993; Szinovacz, Ekerdt, and Vinick 1992). Many spouses do not retire simultaneously, resulting in various combinations of employment and retirement within couples (e.g., both spouses are retired, both spouses are still in their career jobs, one is still in primary retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple job while the other is retired). This points to the importance of incorporating the diversity of both spouses' circumstances into models of retirement and psychological well-being.
Second, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple, most prior studies of retirement have been cross-sectional in nature. But differences in psychological well-being by retirement status at one point in time may or may not reflect changes in psychological well-being as individuals move from employment to retirement over their life course. Dynamic, longitudinal analyses are essential to assess whether snapshot distinctions between groups (of retirees and nonretirees) capture any effects of the actual retirement transition. In this article, we draw on longitudinal data of late-midlife workers and retirees (and their spouses) to examine the dynamic relationship between couples' work or retirement status and psychological well-being.
Theoretical Background
We draw on several theoretical perspectives in developing a model linking retirement and psychological well-being.
Role theory.
Role theory (e.g., George 1993), in conjunction with a life-course perspective (e.g., Elder 1995; Moen 2001), provides one of the most commonly used explanations of adjustment to retirement. But, in point of fact, role theory lends itself to several life-course–related formulations. From the role enhancement perspective, men and women who retire from their career jobs are vulnerable to feelings of role loss, which can lead to psychological distress. This vantage point postulates that employment is central to one's identity; loss of this critically important work role, and/or the environmental loss accompanying retirement, produces concomitant decline in morale and an increase in depressive symptoms. Alternatively, retirement from the demands of one's primary career job may be a major life-course–role exit that serves to reduce role strain and overload, thereby enhancing psychological well-being. This role-strain reduction theoretical perspective also points to the importance of role quality (e.g., Vandewater, Ostrove, and Stewart 1997), suggesting that circumstances around employment, retirement, and the transition from one to the other should matter.
Continuity theory.
Continuity theory (e.g., Atchley 1989; Richardson and Kilty 1991) proposes that people tend to maintain earlier lifestyle patterns, self-esteem, and values, even as they exit their primary career jobs, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple. Therefore, retirement need not lead to maladjustment and distress. Consistent with this perspective, one early panel study by George and Maddox 1977 found remarkable stability in life satisfaction among 57 older men over a 5-year period. The sample, however, combined both those who were continuously retired and those who retired between Time 1 and Time 2. Consequently, the results may not precisely reflect the impact of actual retirement transitions on life-satisfaction changes.
A Life-Course, Ecological Model
We propose that the link between retirement and psychological well-being can best be understood through the lens of a life-course, ecological perspective (Kim and Moen 2001a, Kim and Moen 2001b). The life-course approach (Elder 1995) highlights the dynamic retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple of development and change over the life span. The ecology of human development (Bronfenbrenner 1995) and role context (e.g., Moen 2001; Musick, Herzog, and House 1999) perspectives suggest locating transitions in the social contexts of other roles, relations, and developmental processes. In viewing retirement as a life-course, ecological transition, we focus on process, the interdependency of linked lives, and context.
Process.
Process connotes both the dynamics of moving into retirement and possible mechanisms through which retirement status might affect psychological well-being. We developed a life-course model of the retirement transition, examining Time 2 psychological well-being, controlling for the same measure 2 years earlier, and considering three groups: the stably employed in their primary career jobs, the stably retired, and those who moved from their career jobs to retirement between two waves of the survey.
Process also suggests that particular mechanisms may facilitate the psychological well-being of those either in or moving into retirement. Research evidence points to three possible mechanisms linking retirement status and psychological well-being: (a) economic resources, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple, (b) personal resources, and (c) social–relational resources. Prior studies have found that inadequate incomes and financial problems predict dissatisfaction and maladjustment in retirement (Atchley 1976b; Gallo, Bradley, Siegel, and Kasl 2000; Hendrick, Wells, and Faletti 1982; Richardson and Kilty 1991). Perceptions of having an adequate income are also related to retirement adjustment (Kim and Moen 1999).
Personal resources include not only sociodemographic status but also health and personality variables. A substantial body of research retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple shown that health is positively correlated to retirement adjustment (e.g., Shaw, Patterson, Semple, and Grant 1998). Personality characteristics also play a crucial role in retirement adaptation (e.g., Robbins, Lee, and Wan 1994). The most important individual difference mediating or moderating the retirement–well-being linkage may well be a sense of personal control. As people move through late midlife they may experience a decline in personal control, given that the environmental events accompanying aging limit the range of outcomes that are actually attainable (Rodin 1990; Weisz 1983). The relationship between retirement and a sense of personal control, however, is not at all clear. Some scholars presume that retirement may mean the loss of one of the most meaningful sources of instrumental control in life, the work role (e.g., Ross and Drentea 1998; Schulz 1976). Others suggest that retirement may offer more time and opportunities for realizing one's goals and carrying out plans, thus increasing personal efficacy (e.g., Lachman 1986).
Evidence from a range of studies suggests that a sense of personal control has significant influences on retirement adjustment (Fretz, Kluge, Ossana, Jones, and Merikangas 1989; Hendrick et al. 1982; Mutran, Reitzes, and Fernandez 1997; Taylor-Carter and Cook 1995), retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple. For example, in a study of the relationships between self-efficacy and anxiety and depression about retirement, a low sense of self-efficacy was one of the best predictors of preretirement worry, in addition to concerns about money or health (Fretz et al. 1989). In their survey of individuals ages 50 to 70, Herzog, House, and Morgan 1991 found that those who stopped work and felt they had little or no choice reported lower levels of health and psychological well-being compared with those who voluntarily retired and those working the amount they would like. The third set of resources is social–relational, which we discuss in the next section.
Linked lives.
A key tenet of a life-course, ecological perspective is that lives are interdependent. Developmental processes always take place in the context of ongoing social relations, including developmental shifts that occur with retirement. Individuals frequently decide to retire on the basis of changes in others' health and/or retirement exits or plans. Furthermore, the retirement experience is played out in a network of shifting social relations. It is crucial to consider the work or retirement statuses of both spouses, given that each spouse's retirement transition represents an important life event for the couple, requiring adjustment on the part of both spouses.
Research on retirement adjustment suggests that marriage and family relationships serve as social–relational resources in retirement adjustment (George and Maddox 1977; Gove, Style, and Hughes 1990; Hendrick et al. 1982; Kessler and Essex 1982; Kilty and Behling 1985; Mutran et al. 1997; Vinick and Ekerdt 1989). Strong emotional support from a spouse may well help individuals overcome stressful life events, thereby sustaining their psychological well-being. For instance, Lee 1978 reported significant contributions of marital satisfaction to morale for older men and women (aged 60 and older), but the positive effect of marital satisfaction on single women parents dating benicia was notably stronger for women than for men. Other research findings similarly indicate that women's psychological well-being is more heavily influenced by marital quality than is men's (Acitelli and Antonucci 1994; Dehle and Weiss 1998; Ross 1995).
Context.
To fully understand the links between retirement and psychological well-being, one must also consider the contextual factors in which retirement transitions are embedded. A key contextual consideration is gender, given that the retirement experience may well be a different process for women than it is for men. Because of their different work histories, employment opportunities, and general life experiences, women appear to adjust to retirement differently than men do. Specifically, there is evidence that women have more negative attitudes toward retirement than men do, and retirement is more disruptive and more malaysian dating sites & app to be linked with greater depression and loneliness for women than it is for men (Atchley 1976a; Streib and Schneider 1971). Some researchers have found gender differences in the predictors of retirement attitudes and satisfaction (e.g., Atchley 1982; Calasanti 1996; George, Fillenbaum, and Palmore 1984; Matthews and Brown 1987; Quick and Moen 1998; Seccombe and Lee 1986).
Prior levels (baseline) of psychological well-being are another key contextual consideration, with two possible models of their moderating effects. The first is the cumulation of advantage/disadvantage model (closely associated with continuity theory), with those already high on measure of psychological well-being experiencing the same level or even an increase following a recent transition to retirement. Correspondingly, the most disadvantaged would be the writing an online dating profile for guys likely to experience a positive change in psychological well-being concomitant a transition to retirement. Conversely, the role strain reduction perspective (Moen, Kim, and Hofmeister 2001) presumes that the least advantaged on a particular measure may well experience heightened psychological well-being in light of a movement out of (presumably stressful) career jobs and into retirement, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple. From this point of view, becoming retired should reduce psychological distress and promote psychological well-being.
We examined possible moderating effects of gender and prior levels of psychological well-being on changes in psychological well-being for three groups of late-midlife individuals: those not yet retired from their career jobs, those who moved into retirement over the 2-year study period, and those who were stably retired. On the basis of the theoretical arguments offered, we proposed the following hypotheses:
Moving into retirement predicts changes in the psychological well-being of late-midlife adults, with the impact of the retirement transition contingent on gender and prior levels of psychological well-being.
Spouses' employment status, jointly with respondents' own retirement transitions, influence changes in the psychological well-being of late-midlife men and women.
Personal control, marital quality, subjective health, and income adequacy serve as important retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple of the retirement–well-being linkage. Specifically, the effects of employment, retirement status, and transitions into retirement on psychological well-being are indirect, mediated by changes in contextual factors (financial, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple, relational, and personal resources). We also expected marital quality to be more influential for the psychological well-being of women than men.
Methods
Sample and Procedure
The data were drawn from the two waves of Cornell Retirement and Well-Being Study (Moen complete free dating sites without payment al. 2001). The original retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple consisted of 762 randomly selected individuals aged 50 to 72 years, including both retirees and workers who were not yet retired. The participants were recruited from six major upstate New York employers. Participants were randomly selected from lists provided by their employers and contacted by letter and telephone to request their participation and arrange for an interview. A total of 1,206 men and women were contacted, and 762 (63%) agreed to participate and completed the interview process.
The present study involves a subsample of married participants: 282 men (60%) and 176 women (38%). The average age of the subsample was 60 years (SD = 5.72) at the first interview (1994–1995), with a range from 50 to 72 years. Because watch dating naked online the demographics of the region, our sample consists of mostly White respondents (95%). Although retirement can be defined in many different ways (see Elder and Pavalko 1993), in the present study, retirement is defined as receiving a pension (or early retirement package) from a career employer and/or Social Security benefits. Our operationalization captures the exit from full-time, career employment. (Another way of defining retirement is as the final exit from the workforce. However, as significant numbers of retirees are taking on part-time jobs, it is difficult to define when an exit is indeed "final.")
The first wave of data was collected from 1994 to 1995. The majority of participants were interviewed in person with a structured interview, which took from 1 to 2H hr. Participants also independently completed a self-administered questionnaire. The survey instruments tapped issues relevant to employment history, retirement, health, activities, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple, and psychological and attitudinal domains. The questionnaires in booklet form were adopted from various sources, including the Health and Retirement Survey (Juster 1992), the Quality of Employment Survey (Quinn and Staines 1979), and the Women's Roles and Well-Being Study (Moen, Dempster-McClain, and Williams 1992). The second wave of data was collected about 2 years later, from 1996 to 1997 (Time 2), and the third wave was collected from 1998 to 1999 (Time 3). At the second and the third waves, best dating website for people over 50 christian and 91%, respectively, of the surviving adults in the original sample were reinterviewed. We primarily draw on Waves 1 and 2, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple, but include as well those who retired between Waves 2 and 3 in our category of newly retired. Thus some newly retired respondents left their primary career jobs between 1994 to 1995 and 1996 to 1997 (26 retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple and 15 women); others did so between 1996 to 1997 and 1998 to 1999 (21 men and 18 women). Because analyses revealed online dating without registration difference in effects between the two groups, we combined them as newly retired between Time 1 and Time 2.
The average age of retirement from their primary career jobs was 58 years for men and 59 years for women. At Time 2, there were 106 not-yet-retired respondents and 352 retirees. Eighty respondents (23% of the retirees) moved into retirement between Time 1 and Time 2. The men reported an average household income of $45,315 (mdn = $55,000) and the women reported a mean household income of $40,400 (mdn = $45,000). The health status of the participants was typically very good (as indicated by self-rating of health averaging 8.08 [SD = 1.91] for men and 7.93 [SD = 2.01] for women on a rating scale ranging from 0 [very serious health problems] to 10 [very best health]). Overall, the average length of marriage was about 31 years at the time of the first interview for both men and women. Note that this sample of married individuals may be more likely than the general population to be satisfied with their marriages because they represent the marital "survivors," those in late midlife whose marriages are longer in duration. That is, those most dissatisfied may have already left unhappy marriages and are, consequently, not in the married sample.
Measures
Primary independent variables: work/retirement status and transition.
The respondents were divided into three work/retirement-transition groups: (a) long-term retirees, who left their primary career employment before the first interview and thus were continuously retired at both Time 1 and Time 2 (181 men and 91 women), (b) newly retired individuals, who left their career jobs at some time between Time 1 and Time 2 (47 men and 33 women), and (c) not-yet-retired individuals, who had not left their career jobs and were continuously employed in these career jobs at both Time 1 and Time 2 (54 men and 52 women). The spouses were simply divided into those who were employed and those who were not employed at Time 2. This is because finer divisions according to spouses' retirement transitions created very small cell sizes in the couples' joint distribution.
Dependent variables: morale and depressive symptoms.
We used two measures of psychological well-being, at two points in time. First, the Philadelphia Geriatric Center (PGC) Morale scale (Lawton 1975) assesses a positive aspect of psychological well-being in late midlife adults. The scale was developed to measure the subjective psychological well-being of individuals of retirement age or older. We used a subset of seven items from the PGC Morale scale, which measures attitude toward one's own aging (e.g., "I am as happy now as I was when I was younger."). Items were answered "yes" or "no." The average correlation coefficient among the seven PGC Morale scale items was .23, with a range from .16 to .40, and all correlations were statistically significant (p < .01) at Time 1, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple. Internal consistency (Cronbach α) of the scale was .68 at Time 1. The test–retest reliability was .60 (p < .001).
Second, depressive symptoms were assessed with 12 items taken from the 20-item Center for Epidemiologic Studies–Depression scale (CES-D; Radloff 1977). The validity and utility of this scale for use with community-dwelling older adults has dating after divorce old and fat demonstrated in previous studies (Berkman et al. 1986; Radloff 1977). The items of the CES-D scale ask about the ways the respondent has felt or behaved during the past week (e.g., retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple felt bothered by things that usually don't bother me."). The average correlation coefficient among the 12 CES-D scale items was .39, with a range from .17 to .72, and all correlations were statistically significant (p < .01) at Time 1. The alpha reliability for this scale was .88 at Time 1. The test–retest reliability over 2 years was .58 (p < .001).
Contextual (mediating) variables: changes in income adequacy, subjective health, marital quality, and personal control.
We assessed changes in various resources from Time 1 to Time 2. Income adequacy is respondents' rank of the adequacy of their current incomes retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple to their income needs, on a scale of 0 to 100, on which 0 represents completely inadequate, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple, and 100 represents more than adequate. The subjective health measure is respondents' rating of their health status on a scale ranging from 0 (very serious health problems) to 10 (very best health). We measured marital quality using the sum of two items of marital satisfaction and marital-conflict frequency. First, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple, marital satisfaction was assessed using the response to a single question, "Taking all things together, how satisfied are you with your marriage?" Respondents had a choice of five answers ranging from completely satisfied (5) to not at all satisfied (1). The measure of marital conflict was derived from the question, "How often would you say the two of you typically have serious disagreements or conflicts?" The choices were more than once a week sex dating sim, about once a week (4), 1–3 times a month (3), less than once a month (2), or never (1). To create composites of marital quality with higher scores indicating higher marital quality, we reversed marital conflict scores. The two measures of marital quality are significantly and negatively correlated with each other, r = −.41 (average of Time 1 and Time 2 correlations, p < .01).
A sense of personal control was measured with seven items from the Mastery Scale (Pearlin and Schooler 1978; e.g., "What happens to me in the future mostly depends on me."). Each item was followed with a four-level response format ranging from strongly agree (1) to strongly disagree (4). We calculated the scale score as the mean of the items, with higher scores indicating higher levels of personal control. The reliability of the scale (Cronbach α) was .84 at Time 1. The test–retest reliability (between Time 1 and Time 2) was .40 (p < .001).
Multiple Imputation (MI) of Missing Data
Regarding missing data (2–23 cases for men and 1–5 cases for women) for some of predictor variables, we performed MI of missing data by means of the NORM program developed by Schafer 1999, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple. First we ran the expectation-maximization (EM) algorithm step, whereby unknown parameters of complete data structure retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple estimated on the basis of assumed values for the parameters. This process repeats until the estimates converge to maximum-likelihood estimates that implicitly average over the distribution of the missing values, with those estimated parameters serving as starting values for subsequent runs of data augmentation (DA). The DA is an iterative process that alternately fills in the missing data and makes inferences about the unknown parameters. The DA step first performs a random imputation of missing data on the basis of parameter estimates generated by the EM as starting values and then draws new parameters on the basis of the observed and imputed data. In the present study, we performed a single-imputation inference. Then we compared single imputation findings with MI inference results. For MI inferences, m = 5 (where m is the number of imputations) imputed data sets were generated through DA, and the resulting five sets of parameters and standard errors were subjected to an iteration procedure for MI inference (Rubin 1987) using the NORM program. The results regarding the estimates of the model coefficients based on the single imputation inference were approximately identical with the results based on MI inferences. Retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple the regression models specified in the Results section, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple, we report findings of the regression analyses that were based on the single-imputation inference data to evaluate overall model fits (i.e., retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple, F statistic and R²) and statistical comparisons of the regression models (i.e., ΔR²).
Analytic Strategy
Because we believe that both one's work/retirement status and the transition to retirement are gendered processes, contributing to psychological well-being in distinctive ways for men and women, we analyzed all data separately by gender. We conducted analyses with ordinary least squares (OLS) regression. We first examined the relationship between retirement status/transitions and psychological well-being. In Model 1, the two psychological well-being measures, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple, morale and depressive symptoms, were separately regressed on sets of variables reflecting respondents' retirement status and transitions. Age was included as a covariate and Time 1 psychological well-being score was included to allow us to examine the effect of initial levels of psychological well-being on later level of psychological well-being (or continuity of psychological well-being over time). The interactions between Time 1 psychological well-being and retirement transitions test whether the relationship between retirement status/transitions and subsequent psychological well-being depends on the level of Time 1 psychological well-being. To decrease the likelihood of multicolinearity between the interactive term and its components, we centered the Time 1 psychological well-being scores before taking their cross-products with retirement status/transitions by subtracting the mean value for each of these variables from individual scores (e.g., Jaccard, Turrisi, and Wan 1990). Next, in Model 2, we added spouses' employment status and the interaction between respondents' retirement status/transitions and spouses' employment status. The interactions retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple whether respondents' retirement status/transitions have a differential impact on changes in psychological well-being depending on spouses' employment status. Finally, in Model 3 we added both Time 1 measures and change scores of personal control, marital quality, subjective health, and income adequacy to test whether changes in contextual variables mediate any effects of retirement status/transitions retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple changes in psychological well-being after controlling for the baseline (Time 1) scores of these mechanisms. We created measures of change from Time 1 to Time 2 by subtracting Time 1 scores from Time 2 scores.
Results
Descriptive Results
Table 1 shows the measures used in this study and their score ranges, means, and standard deviations at Time 1 and Time 2. There are statistically significant gender differences and/or temporal changes in contextual variables as well as psychological well-being measures. Men were higher than women in morale, and women reported more depressive symptoms than men did. Men tended to report higher income adequacy than women did, and there was an increase in income adequacy for both men and women. However, the increase in income adequacy between Time 1 and Time 2 was more dramatic for men than for women. For both men and women, levels of subjective health increased between survey waves, but there was significant decline in terms of marital quality (as indicated with increased levels of marital conflict and decreased levels of marital satisfaction at Time 2). Men tended to show higher levels of personal control than women did. Regardless of gender, however, personal control decreased from Time 1 to Time 2.
Changes in Mechanisms
In preliminary analyses we conducted a series of multiple regressions testing the impact of retirement status/transitions on changes in each contextual variable separately (results not shown). Similar to Model 1, the regression equations estimated the effects of (a) the baseline contextual variable (income adequacy, subjective health, marital quality, and personal control), (b) retirement status/transitions, and (c) the interactions between Time 1 contextual variables and retirement status/transitions. The results show that retirement status/transitions were significantly associated with changes in the contextual variable measure from Time 1 to Time 2. Specifically, being newly retired was related to decreased income adequacy for men (β = −.22, p < .05) but retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple income adequacy for women β = .22, p < .05). A significant interaction indicated that women who reported lower income adequacy at Time 1 experienced greater increases in income adequacy (β = −.22, p < .05). Being newly retired was also related to decreased marital quality for both men retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple women (β = −.45, p < .05, for men and β = −.36, p < .05, for women). However, for men, those who were higher in marital quality reported greater decreases in marital quality after moving into retirement compared with those who were lower in marital quality prior to retirement (β for interaction = −.62, p < .05).
Retirement and Changes in Psychological Well-Being
Table 2 and Table 3 summarize findings of the hierarchical regression analyses predicting changes in psychological well-being by respondents' retirement status/transitions, their spouses' employment status, and other contextual variables for men and women, respectively. When we compared the estimated means of men's morale at Time 2 (after controlling for age and Time 1 morale), we found that newly retired men reported the highest morale score (estimated M = 5.92, standard error [SE] = .19) as opposed to those who were continuously retired (estimated M = 5.70, SE = .10) or those who had not yet retired from their primary-career jobs (estimated M = 5.55, SE = .19). An interaction between Time 1 morale and retirement status/transitions tested whether or not those with lower morale experienced the greatest change following retirement. We found that baseline morale indeed served as a moderator in the relationship between men's retirement status/transitions and changes in their morale (see Table 2 ). Fig. 1 depicts the predicted regression lines for the significant interactions found in men's psychological well-being. Specifically, among men who moved into retirement by Time 2 (the newly retired), those who were lower in morale at Time 1 experienced greater increases in their morale compared with those who were higher in morale.
Regarding depressive symptoms at Time 2, men who were continuously retired over both waves of the survey (average years retired = 4) tended to report the highest number of depressive symptoms (estimated M = 4.92, SE = .50), compared with men who only recently retired (estimated M = 3.96, SE = .95) or men who had not yet retired from their primary-career jobs (estimated M = 4.04, SE = .95). There was a significant interaction between Time 1 CES-D and retirement transitions: Continuously retired men who were higher in CES-D at Time 1 reported greater increases in CES-D scores between Time 1 and Time 2 (see Fig. 1). Thus, there appears to be something of cumulation of advantage versus disadvantage for continuously retired, in that those high in depressive symptoms at Time 1 reported even more symptoms at Time 2.
Turning to findings for women, there was no strong evidence of significant main effects of retirement transitions or of interaction effects between retirement transitions and Time 1 psychological well-being on women's psychological well-being at Time 2 (see Table 3 ).
Linked Lives: Spouse Employment Status
As can be seen in Table 2dating sites for big and beautiful were no statistically significant differences in men's and women's well-being depending on their spouses' employment status, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple. We further tested whether changes in spouses' employment status (rather than static status of spouses' employment) mattered for changes in psychological well-being of men and women (results not shown). The regression model included age, Time 1 psychological well-being, respondents' retirement transitions, interactions between Time 1 psychological well-being and respondents' retirement transitions, spouses' employment changes, and the interactions between respondents' retirement transitions and spouses' employment changes. We categorized spouses' employment status/change as follows: (a) spouses continuously out of the workforce at both Time 1 and Time 2, (b) spouses change of employment status between Time 1 and Time 2, and (c) spouses continuously employed at both Time 1 and Time 2. A significant interaction indicated that men who are continuously retired whose wives are also continuously out of the workforce tend to report lower levels of depressive symptoms at Time 2 compared with their counterparts whose wives are continuously employed or have changed employment status (β = −.44, p < .01). The finding suggests a positive impact (in terms of reduced depressive symptoms) of having a nonemployed wife for those men who are continuously retired.
Resources as Mediating Mechanisms
For men's morale and depressive symptoms, adding contextual factors significantly increases the variance accounted for (ΔR² = .12, p < .05, for morale and ΔR² = .12, p < .05, for depressive symptoms; see Table 2 ). As expected, various resources seem to serve as mechanisms through which retirement circumstances shape men's psychological well-being, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple. Specifically, increases (between waves) in perceptions of income adequacy, subjective health, and personal control were associated with concomitant increase in men's morale after controlling for Time 1 levels of income adequacy, subjective health, and personal control. As can be seen in Model 3 of Table 2retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple, for men's morale, the interaction between being newly retired and Retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple 1 morale is attenuated when the contextual variables are added to the model (standardized estimate β decreases from −.20 to −.15). Regarding men's depressive symptoms, decreased health and decreased personal control were related to increased depressive symptoms after controlling for subjective health and personal control at Time 1. Note that the significant interaction between being continuously retired and Time 1 CES-D scores was no longer significant once these contextual variables were added to the model, suggesting that they do indeed serve as mediating mechanisms between retirement circumstances and men's depressive symptoms (standardized estimate β decreases from .26 to .16).
Turning to women's psychological well-being, adding contextual variables to the model significantly increases the variance accounted for (ΔR² = .17, p < .05, for morale and ΔR² = .17, p < .05, for depressive symptoms; see Table 3 ). Increases in subjective health and personal control were associated with increased morale after we controlled for initial levels of subjective health and personal control. Declines in women's subjective health, marital quality, and personal control over a 2-year period were related to increased depressive symptoms, after we controlled for baseline levels of subjective health and personal control.
Discussion
In this study we aimed to move beyond the mixed findings to date on the links between retirement and psychological well-being by constructing and testing a dynamic life-course, ecological model that included both mediators and moderators and changes in retirement status and psychological well-being over a 2-year period. What we found points to the complexity of the retirement process and the importance of locating the retirement–well-being interface in particular contexts.
The Retirement Process in Context
Our findings indicate that retirement is not simply a state but a complex process, embedded in prior psychological resources as well as gendered experiences. Men tend to experience increases in their morale as they undergo actual transitions into retirement. This is consistent with previous findings of positive changes in life satisfaction during the 1st year postretirement among male retirees (Gall et al. 1997). It may well reflect the enjoyable "honeymoon" phase proposed by Atchley 1976b. He suggested that right after the event of retirement actually good dating apps often is a euphoric, busy, honeymoon phase during which retirees may feel more energetic, healthy, and satisfied as they pursue desired plans or experiment with new activities and roles. These findings seem to support the reduced role strain hypothesis: Retired men feel released from the pressures of their career jobs, thus retirement is beneficial for their psychological well-being. Other researchers also have shown that retirement may provide freedom from the time demands and daily structure of work life to pursue other interests and activities at a relaxed pace (e.g., Kelly and Westcott 1991; Nelson 1980). In that sense, retirement may represent a gain in the resource of time and a reduction in role strain. Consequently, when late-midlife men move into retirement, their morale or general satisfaction with life appears to increase.
Our longitudinal analysis suggests the importance of viewing retirement not only as a process (with differences in well-being, for example, between the newly retired, who have only recently made this transition, and those who have been retired for a longer period of time) but also as one occurring in particular contexts. Specifically, the impact of moving into retirement on subsequent changes in morale depends on initial levels of morale: Men retiring from their primary career jobs who have low levels of retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple tend retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple experience greater improvements in morale following retirement, congruent with the role strain reduction theoretical perspective. Thus the retirement transition may well reduce the role strain and overload associated with the career jobs retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple those with low morale, thereby promoting their psychological well-being. Our findings also demonstrate that continuously retired men tend to report greater increases in depressive symptoms (compared with both those who are newly retired and those who are not yet retired), suggesting that being retired (as opposed to moving into retirement) may be a significant contributor to depression in later adulthood (e.g., Bosse et al. 1987; Wright 1990). The relationship between being retired and depressive symptoms, however, varies somewhat depending on prior psychological well-being. Consistent with the cumulation of disadvantage model, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple, those retired men who are relatively higher in depressive symptoms are vulnerable to experiencing even more depressive symptoms as they move through the retirement years.
Gender is also a key factor in shaping the ways in which individuals experience the transition to retirement. Both one's own and one's spouse's work/retirement status and transitions are more strongly related to men's psychological retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple than women's. Although we found no evidence in support of earlier findings retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple retirement with greater depression for women than for men (e.g., Atchley 1976a; Streib and Schneider 1971), these prior findings may reflect women's initially disadvantaged position. Specifically, our study shows that women come to retirement with higher initial levels of depressive symptoms but lower levels of morale, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple, personal control, and perceived income adequacy (see Table 1 ).
Retirement as a Relational Transition
We focused on the interdependence of linked lives regarding the psychological well-being of married men and women around what are increasingly two retirement transitions, his and hers (e.g., Kim and Moen 2001a, Kim and Moen 2001b). Accordingly, we conceptualized retirement as a relational transition and considered both spouses' conjoint circumstances. On the basis of previous findings of significant spouse influences in accounting for variations in postretirement marital quality (e.g., Moen et al. 2001; Myers & Booth, 1996; Szinovacz 1996), we expected that the effects of respondents' retirement status or transitions on their psychological well-being would be contingent on their spouses' employment status. Our data, however, provide no strong evidence that spouses' employment status conditions the effect of respondents' own retirement transitions on subsequent psychological well-being. Although it is not statistically significant (p = .10), there is a tendency for newly retired men whose wives are still employed to report the fewest depressive symptoms at Time 2 (after controlling for the initial level of depressive symptoms), whereas men who are not yet retired from their primary career jobs but whose wives are no longer in the workforce report the greatest depressive symptoms. Such interesting patterns warrant further attention in future research, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple. It may well be that men do better in terms of psychological well-being when they retire first and their wives subsequently follow them in to retirement.
Retirement and Resources
We find that resources—financial, personal, and social–relational—serve as mechanisms for explaining the link between retirement status and changes in psychological well-being. For both men and women, the relationship between retirement and retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple well-being seems to be partially mediated by changes in these resources, which, in turn, predict changes in psychological well-being. First, changes in income adequacy matter for men's morale but not for women's. Second, changes in subjective assessments of physical health are consistent predictors of changes in psychological well-being for both men and women. Third, sense of personal control is a key personal resource: Increases in one's sense of control from Time 1 to Time 2 predict increased morale and decreased depressive symptoms for men and decreased depressive symptoms for women. In fact, the personal-control measure is the strongest predictor of changes in men's morale and changes in depressive symptoms for both men and women, and the second strongest predictor of changes in women's morale (following subjective health). These findings reinforce prior evidence linking personal control and psychological well-being (e.g., Lachman and Burack 1993) by showing the salutary effects of a sense of personal control around the retirement transition. Finally, the hypothesis that marital quality matters more for women's well-being than for men's is supported by our data. For women, but not for men, declines in marital quality predict increases in depressive symptoms. Women appear to be more sensitive to changes in the quality of retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple marital relationship than men are. The stronger effects of marital quality on women's psychological well-being seem to be consistent with the typically greater involvement of women in marital and family roles over the life course, as well as the greater focus on interpersonal relationships for women than for men (Helgeson, 1984).
Strength and Limitations
This study has several distinct methodological and substantive strengths. First, we focused on gender differences in the impact of retirement status/transitions on subsequent adjustment (rather than statistically controlling for gender differences), which may contribute to redrawing what has been a "male model" of retirement (Calasanti 1996; Moen 1996). We found both similarities and differences between men and women in the relationships linking couples' retirement status/transitions and various resources to psychological well-being. Second, we considered retirement transitions as a couple-level phenomenon. This is particularly important, as most retiring individuals are married, and an increasing number of couples experience (or will experience) the retirement of both spouses. Finally, our use of longitudinal data permitted us to estimate the amount and direction of changes in psychological well-being, revealing important distinctions between being retired versus moving into retirement.
The most obvious limitation comes from constraints on generalization of the findings. Our sample included mostly White, relatively healthy men and women in late-midlife recruited retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple large organizations in upstate New York. The effect of retirement status and transitions on psychological well-being may differ among couples from different ethnic groups and for socially and economically disadvantaged couples (e.g., Szinovacz and DeViney 1999). In addition, the couples in our data belong to the cohorts born between 1922 and 1944. As with any age cohort, their employment and retirement experiences, as well as their perceptions of psychological well-being and marriage, are inevitably influenced by the historical context in which they live (Elder and Caspi 1992). Caution should be exercised in generalizing our findings to future cohorts. Further research on retirement transitions and psychological well-being could also consider more contextual variables, such as pre-retirement job characteristics, the timing of retirement, voluntariness of retirement, and retirement planning. Additional relational contexts should be probed, using a variety of couple-level or partner-related variables (e.g., caregiving activities, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple, the division of housework, and spouse's health).
The conceptual and practical utility of our life-course ecological perspective is demonstrated by the evidence that psychological adaptation processes shift over time and vary by context for three groups of married men and women: those not yet retired, those retiring during the 2-year study period, and those already retired at Time 1. The findings reported here underscore the complexity of adaptation processes as late midlife men and women navigate and negotiate life transitions such as retirement, suggesting the importance of personal (such as personal control and health) and social–relational (such as marital quality and spouses' employment status) resources, even apart from a sense of financial adequacy. Future research should acknowledge and examine the dynamics and the heterogeneity of well-being around the retirement transition, including its embeddedness in gender, and other multilayered contexts.
Table 1. Means and Standard Deviations of Variables Used in the Analysis
Men (n = 282) Women (n = 176)
Time 1 Time 2 Time 1 Time 2
Variables (Possible Range) M SD M SD M SD M SD
Age (yr) 60.92 5.54 62.95 5.49 59.85 5.68 61.88 5.63
Income Adequacy (0–100)^a,b 71.37 20.59 82.34 17.72 68.03 23.58 73.60 22.32
Subjective Health (0–10)^b 8.06 1.99 8.15 1.79 7.95 2.08 8.19 1.77
Marital Quality (2–10)^b 8.17 1.18 7.67 1.95 8.06 1.41 7.84 1.86
Marital Satisfaction (1–5)^b 4.39 0.70 4.13 1.20 4.27 0.85 4.19 1.06
Marital Conflict (1–5)^b 2.22 0.79 2.47 1.00 2.21 0.94 2.34 1.03
Personal Control (1–4)^a,b 3.17 0.49 2.75 0.33 3.03 0.55 2.68 0.30
Morale (0–7)^a 5.72 1.52 5.71 1.57 5.32 1.74 5.53 1.73
Depressive Symptoms (0–84)^a 4.28 7.17 4.59 7.70 7.96 11.28 7.52 12.40
Men (n = 282) Women (n = 176)
Time 1 Time 2 Time 1 Time 2
Variables (Possible Range) M SD M SD M SD M SD
Age (yr) 60.92 5.54 62.95 5.49 59.85 5.68 61.88 5.63
Income Adequacy (0–100)^a,b 71.37 20.59 82.34 17.72 68.03 23.58 73.60 22.32
Subjective Health (0–10)^b 8.06 1.99 8.15 1.79 7.95 2.08 8.19 1.77
Marital Quality (2–10)^b 8.17 1.18 7.67 1.95 8.06 1.41 7.84 1.86
Marital Satisfaction (1–5)^b 4.39 0.70 4.13 1.20 4.27 0.85 4.19 1.06
Marital Conflict (1–5)^b 2.22 0.79 2.47 1.00 2.21 0.94 2.34 1.03
Personal Control (1–4)^a,b 3.17 0.49 2.75 0.33 3.03 0.55 2.68 0.30
Morale (0–7)^a 5.72 1.52 5.71 1.57 5.32 1.74 5.53 1.73
Depressive Symptoms (0–84)^a 4.28 7.17 4.59 7.70 7.96 11.28 7.52 12.40
Open in new tab
Table 1. Means and Standard Deviations of Variables Used in the Analysis
Men (n = 282) Women (n = 176)
Time 1 Time 2 Time 1 Time 2
Variables (Possible Range) M SD M SD M SD M SD
Age (yr) 60.92 5.54 62.95 5.49 59.85 5.68 61.88 5.63
Income Adequacy (0–100)^a,b 71.37 20.59 82.34 17.72 68.03 23.58 73.60 22.32
Subjective Health (0–10)^b 8.06 1.99 8.15 1.79 7.95 2.08 8.19 1.77
Marital Quality (2–10)^b 8.17 1.18 7.67 1.95 8.06 1.41 7.84 1.86
Marital Satisfaction (1–5)^b 4.39 0.70 4.13 1.20 4.27 0.85 4.19 1.06
Marital Conflict (1–5)^b 2.22 0.79 2.47 1.00 2.21 0.94 2.34 1.03
Personal Control (1–4)^a,b 3.17 0.49 2.75 0.33 3.03 0.55 2.68 0.30
Morale (0–7)^a 5.72 1.52 5.71 1.57 5.32 1.74 5.53 1.73
Depressive Symptoms (0–84)^a 4.28 7.17 4.59 7.70 7.96 11.28 7.52 12.40
Men (n = 282) Women (n = 176)
Time 1 Time 2 Time 1 Time 2
Variables (Possible Range) M SD M SD M SD M SD
Age (yr) 60.92 5.54 62.95 5.49 59.85 5.68 61.88 5.63
Income Adequacy (0–100)^a,b 71.37 20.59 82.34 17.72 68.03 23.58 73.60 22.32
Subjective Health (0–10)^b 8.06 1.99 8.15 1.79 7.95 2.08 8.19 1.77
Marital Quality (2–10)^b 8.17 1.18 7.67 1.95 8.06 1.41 7.84 1.86
Marital Satisfaction (1–5)^b 4.39 0.70 4.13 1.20 4.27 0.85 4.19 1.06
Marital Conflict (1–5)^b 2.22 0.79 2.47 1.00 2.21 0.94 2.34 1.03
Personal Control (1–4)^a,b 3.17 0.49 2.75 0.33 3.03 0.55 2.68 0.30
Morale (0–7)^a 5.72 1.52 5.71 1.57 5.32 1.74 5.53 1.73
Depressive Symptoms (0–84)^a 4.28 7.17 4.59 7.70 7.96 11.28 7.52 12.40
Open in new tab
Table 2. Regressing Retirement Status/Transitions and Other Variables on Men's Psychological Well-Being at Time 2
Dependent Variables
Morale at Time 2 Depressive Symptoms at Time 2
Independent Variables Model 1 b (SE) Model 2 b (SE) Model 3 b (SE) Model 1 b (SE) Model 2 b (SE) Model 3 b (SE)
Age .01 (.02) .01 (.02) −.00 (.02) −.07 (.08) −.08 (.08) −.09 (.08)
T1WB .71 (.14)^*** .72 (.14)^*** .53 (.13)^*** .32 (.15)^* .36 (.15)^* .29 (.14)^*
Retirement Status/Transitions
CR .08 (.22) .11 (.34) .21 (.31) .79 (1.12) −1.33 (1.69) −1.55 (1.55)
NR .33 (.25) .37 (.40) .35 (.38) .01 (1.12) −1.31 (1.98) −1.67 (1.92)
Not retired^a
CR × T1WB −.00 (.15) −.01 (.15) −.04 (.14) .38 (.16)^* .34 (.16)^* .22 (.15)
NR × T1WB −.49 (.18)^** −.49 (.19)^** −.36 (.17)^* .23 (.19) .21 (.19) .18 (.18)
Spouses' Employment Status
Employed (SP__E) .12 (.37) .06 (.34) −3.00 (1.88) −2.67 (1.75)
CR × SP__E .00 (.43) .07 (.39) 3.57 (2.16) 3.33 (1.99)
NR × SP__E −.05 (.53) −.01 (.49) 1.43 (2.64) 1.74 (2.45)
Contextual Variables
T1 Income Adequacy .01 (.01)^* −.02 (.02)
T1 Subjective Health .17 (.05)^** −.90 (.25)^***
T1 Marital Quality .11 (.07) −.54 (.33)
T1 Personal Control 1.10 (.25)^*** −6.00 (1.23)^***
Income Adequacy Change .01 (.01)^{\ [dagger]\}
Marital Quality Change .00 (.04) −.11 (.23)
Personal Control Change 1.04 (.24)^*** −5.47 (1.22)^***
F 28.68^*** 18.98^*** 15.81^*** 24.43^*** 16.72^*** 14.18^***
df (Model/Residual) 6/271 9/268 17/260 6/271 9/268 17/260
R²/Adjusted R² .39/.38 .39/.37 .51/.48 .35/.34 .36/.34 .48/.45
Open in new tab
Table 3. Regressing Retirement Status/Transitions and Other Variables on Women's Psychological Well-Being at Time 2
Dependent Variables
Morale at Time 2 Depressive Symptoms at Time 2
Independent Variables Model 1 b (SE) Model 2 b (SE) Model 3 b (SE) Model 1 b (SE) Model 2 b (SE) Model 3 b (SE)
Age .00 (.03) .00 (.03) .01 (.03) −.17 (.18) −.15 (.19) −.18 (.17)
T1WB .75 (.12)^*** .75 (.13)^*** .57 (.12)^*** .53 (.11)^*** .54 (.11)^*** .39 (.11)^***
Retirement Status/Transitions
CR −.02 (.37) −.12 (.49) .07 (.45) 1.19 (2.36) .01 (3.18) .19 (2.94)
NR .17 (.31) .23 (.51) .17 (.48) .13 (2.05) −2.85 (3.35) −2.09 (3.14)
Not yet retired^a
CR × T1WB −.13 (.15) −.11 (.16) −.16 (.14) .13 (.16) .12 (.16) .08 (.14)
NR × T1WB −.31 (.19) −.31 (.19) −.32 (.17) −.13 (.17) −.17 (.17) −.07 (.16)
Spouses' Employment Status
Employed (SP__E) .02 (.43) .14 (.39) −1.58 (2.82) −.18 (2.61)
CR × SP__E .40 (.58) −.10 (.53) .42 (3.79) .27 (3.46)
NR × SP__E −.14 (.65) .10 (.60) 5.08 (4.24) 3.07 (4.00)
Contextual Variables
T1 Income Adequacy .01 (.01) −.00 (.04)
T1 Subjective Health .37 (.06)^*** −1.66 (.40)^***
T1 Marital Quality −.14 (.09) .09 (.54)
T1 Personal Control .80 (.35)^* −6.88 retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple Adequacy Change .01 (.01) −.01 (.03)
Subjective Health Change .35 (.09)^*** −1.85 (.55)^**
Marital Quality Change .06 (.06) −.79 (.39)^*
Personal Control Change .67 (.36) −7.02 (2.37)^**
F 15.81^*** 10.56^*** 10.44^*** 11.89^*** 8.06^*** 8.38^***
df (Model/Residual) 6/165 9/162 17/154 6/165 9/162 17/154
R²/Adjusted R² .37/.34 .37/.34 .54/.48 .30/.28 .31/.27 .48/.42
Dependent Variables
Morale at Time 2 Depressive Symptoms at Time 2
Independent Variables Model 1 b (SE) Model 2 b (SE) Model 3 b (SE) Model 1 b (SE) Model 2 b (SE) Model 3 b (SE)
Age .00 (.03) .00 (.03) .01 (.03) −.17 (.18) −.15 (.19) −.18 (.17)
T1WB .75 (.12)^*** .75 (.13)^*** .57 (.12)^*** .53 (.11)^*** .54 (.11)^*** .39 (.11)^***
Retirement Status/Transitions
CR −.02 (.37) −.12 (.49) .07 (.45) 1.19 (2.36) .01 (3.18) .19 (2.94)
NR .17 (.31) .23 (.51) .17 (.48) .13 (2.05) −2.85 (3.35) −2.09 (3.14)
Not yet retired^a
CR × T1WB −.13 (.15) −.11 (.16) −.16 (.14) .13 (.16) .12 (.16) .08 (.14)
NR × T1WB −.31 (.19) −.31 (.19) −.32 (.17) −.13 (.17) −.17 (.17) −.07 (.16)
Spouses' Employment Status
Employed (SP__E) .02 (.43) .14 (.39) −1.58 (2.82) −.18 (2.61)
CR × SP__E .40 (.58) −.10 (.53) .42 (3.79) .27 (3.46)
NR × SP__E −.14 (.65) .10 (.60) 5.08 (4.24) 3.07 (4.00)
Contextual Variables
T1 Income Adequacy .01 (.01) −.00 (.04)
T1 Subjective Health .37 (.06)^*** −1.66 (.40)^***
T1 Marital Retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple (.09) .09 (.54)
T1 Personal Control .80 (.35)^* −6.88 (2.43)^**
Income Adequacy Change .01 (.01) −.01 (.03)
Subjective Health Change .35 (.09)^*** −1.85 (.55)^**
Marital Quality Change .06 (.06) −.79 (.39)^*
Personal Control Change .67 (.36) −7.02 (2.37)^**
F 15.81^*** 10.56^*** 10.44^*** 11.89^*** 8.06^*** 8.38^***
df (Model/Residual) 6/165 9/162 17/154 6/165 9/162 17/154
R²/Adjusted R² .37/.34 .37/.34 .54/.48 .30/.28 .31/.27 .48/.42
Open in new tab
Table 3. Regressing Retirement Status/Transitions and Other Variables on Women's Psychological Well-Being at Time 2
Dependent Variables
Morale at Time 2 Depressive Symptoms at Time 2
Independent Variables Model 1 b (SE) Model 2 b (SE) Model 3 b (SE) Model 1 b (SE) Model 2 b (SE) Model 3 b (SE)
Age .00 (.03) .00 (.03) .01 (.03) −.17 (.18) −.15 (.19) −.18 (.17)
T1WB .75 (.12)^*** .75 (.13)^*** .57 (.12)^*** .53 (.11)^*** .54 (.11)^*** .39 (.11)^***
Retirement Status/Transitions
CR −.02 (.37) −.12 (.49) .07 (.45) 1.19 (2.36) .01 (3.18) .19 (2.94)
NR .17 (.31) .23 (.51) .17 (.48) .13 (2.05) −2.85 (3.35) −2.09 (3.14)
Not yet retired^a
CR × T1WB −.13 (.15) −.11 (.16) −.16 (.14) .13 (.16) .12 (.16) .08 (.14)
NR × T1WB −.31 (.19) −.31 (.19) −.32 (.17) −.13 (.17) −.17 (.17) −.07 (.16)
Spouses' Employment Status
Employed (SP__E) .02 (.43) .14 (.39) −1.58 (2.82) −.18 (2.61)
CR × SP__E .40 (.58) −.10 (.53) .42 (3.79) .27 (3.46)
NR × SP__E −.14 (.65) .10 (.60) 5.08 (4.24) 3.07 (4.00)
Contextual Variables
T1 Income Adequacy .01 (.01) −.00 (.04)
T1 Subjective Health .37 (.06)^*** −1.66 (.40)^***
T1 Marital Quality −.14 (.09) .09 (.54)
T1 Personal Control .80 (.35)^* −6.88 (2.43)^**
Income Adequacy Change .01 (.01) −.01 (.03)
Subjective Health Change .35 (.09)^*** −1.85 (.55)^**
Marital Quality Change .06 (.06) −.79 (.39)^*
Personal Control Change .67 (.36) −7.02 (2.37)^**
F 15.81^*** 10.56^*** 10.44^*** 11.89^*** 8.06^*** 8.38^***
df (Model/Residual) 6/165 9/162 17/154 6/165 9/162 17/154
R²/Adjusted R² .37/.34 .37/.34 .54/.48 .30/.28 .31/.27 .48/.42
Dependent Variables
Morale at Time 2 Depressive Symptoms at Time 2
Independent Variables Model 1 b (SE) Model 2 b (SE) Model 3 b (SE) Model 1 b (SE) Model 2 b (SE) Model 3 b (SE)
Age .00 (.03) .00 (.03) .01 (.03) −.17 (.18) −.15 (.19) −.18 (.17)
T1WB .75 (.12)^*** .75 (.13)^*** .57 (.12)^*** .53 (.11)^*** .54 (.11)^*** .39 (.11)^***
Retirement Status/Transitions
CR −.02 (.37) −.12 (.49) .07 (.45) 1.19 (2.36) .01 (3.18) .19 (2.94)
NR .17 (.31) .23 (.51) .17 (.48) .13 (2.05) −2.85 (3.35) −2.09 (3.14)
Not yet retired^a
CR × T1WB −.13 (.15) −.11 (.16) −.16 (.14) .13 (.16) .12 (.16) .08 (.14)
NR × T1WB −.31 (.19) −.31 (.19) −.32 (.17) −.13 (.17) −.17 (.17) −.07 (.16)
Spouses' Employment Status
Employed (SP__E) .02 (.43) .14 (.39) −1.58 (2.82) −.18 (2.61)
CR × SP__E .40 (.58) −.10 (.53) .42 (3.79) .27 (3.46)
NR × SP__E −.14 (.65) .10 (.60) 5.08 (4.24) 3.07 (4.00)
Contextual Variables
T1 Income Adequacy .01 (.01) −.00 (.04)
T1 Subjective Health .37 (.06)^*** −1.66 (.40)^***
T1 Marital Quality −.14 (.09) .09 (.54)
T1 Personal Control .80 (.35)^* −6.88 (2.43)^**
Income Adequacy Change .01 (.01) −.01 (.03)
Subjective Health Change .35 (.09)^*** −1.85 (.55)^**
Marital Quality Change .06 (.06) −.79 (.39)^*
Personal Control Change .67 (.36) −7.02 (2.37)^**
F 15.81^*** 10.56^*** 10.44^*** 11.89^*** 8.06^*** 8.38^***
df (Model/Residual) 6/165 9/162 17/154 6/165 9/162 17/154
R²/Adjusted R² .37/.34 .37/.34 .54/.48 .30/.28 .31/.27 .48/.42
Open in new tab
Figure 1.
Predicted regression lines for changes in men's psychological well-being by retirement transition status/transitions. The predicted Time 2 well-being scores were computed using the raw (uncentered) scores of Time 1 well-being (adjusted for age) to locate both Time 1 well-being scores and Time 2 well-being scores on the original scale. CESD = Retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple for Epidemiologic Studies–Depression Scale.
Figure 1.
Predicted regression lines for changes in men's psychological well-being by retirement transition status/transitions. The predicted Time 2 well-being scores were computed using the raw (uncentered) scores of Time 1 well-being (adjusted for age) to locate both Time 1 well-being scores and Time 2 well-being scores on the original scale. CESD = Center for Epidemiologic Studies–Depression Scale.
This research was supported by Alfred P. Sloan Foundation Grant 96-6-9 (Phyllis Moen, Principal Investigator) and National Institute on Aging Grant IT50 AG11711-01 (Karl Pillemer and Phyllis Moen, Co-Principal Investigators). Portions of the findings were presented at the 27th International Congress of Psychology meeting, Stockholm, Sweden, July 2000.
We thank John R. Nesselroade and Elaine Wethington for their helpful comments. We also gratefully acknowledge the assistance of the Cornell Employment and Family Careers Institute staff and especially Sarah Demo.
References
Acitelli L. K., Antonucci T. C.,
1994
. Gender differences in the link between marital support and satisfaction in older couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
67:
688
-698.
Atchley R. C.,
1976
. Selected social and psychological differences between men and women in later life. Journal of Gerontology
31:
204
-221. a.
Atchley R. C.,
1976
. The sociology of retirement
Halsted Press, New York. b.
Atchley R. C.,
1982
. The process of retirement: Comparing women and men. Szinovacz M.,ed.Women's retirement: Policy implications of recent research
153
-168. Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.
Atchley R. C.,
1989
. A continuity theory of normal aging. The Gerontologist
29:
183
-190.
Berkman L. R., Berkman C. S., Kasl S., Freeman D. H., Jr. Leo L., Ostfeld A. M., et al.
1986
. Depressive symptoms in relation to physical health and functioning in the elderly. American Journal of Epidemiololgy
124:
372
-388.
Bossé R., Aldwin C. M., Levenson M. R., Ekerdt D. J.,
1987
. Mental health differences among retirees and workers: Findings from the Normative Aging Study. Psychology and Aging
2:
383
-389.
Bossé R., Aldwin C. M., Levenson M. R., Workman-Daniels K.,
1990
. Differences in social support among retirees and workers: Findings from the Normative Aging Study, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple. Psychology and Aging
5:
41
-47.
Bronfenbrenner U.,
1995
. The bioecological model from a life course perspective: Reflections of a participant observer. Moen P., Elder G. H., Jr. Lüscher K.,ed.Examining lives in context: Perspectives on the ecology of human development
599
-618. American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.
Calasanti T. M.,
1996
. Gender and life satisfaction in retirement: An assessment of the male model. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences
51B:
S18
-S29.
Dehle C., Weiss R. L.,
1998
. Sex differences in prospective associations between marital quality and depressed mood. Journal of Marriage and the Family
60:
1002
-1011.
Ekerdt D. J., Bossé R., LoCastro J. S.,
1983
. Claims that retirement improves health. Journal of Gerontology
38:
231
-236.
Elder G. H., Jr.
1995
. The life course paradigm: Social change and individual development. Moen P., Elder G., Jr. Luscher K.,ed.Examining lives in context: Perspectives on the ecology of human development
101
-140. American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.
Elder G, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple. H., Jr, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple. Caspi A.,
1992
. Studying lives in a changing society: Sociological and personological explorations. Zucker R. A., Rabin A. I., Aronoff J., Frank S. J.,ed.Personality structure in the life course
276
-322. Springer, New York.
Elder G. H., Jr. Pavalko E. K.,
1993
. Work careers in men's later years: Transitions, trajectories, and historical change. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences
48:
S180
-S191.
Elwell F., Maltbie-Crannell A. D.,
1981
. The impact of role loss upon coping resources and life satisfaction of the elderly. Journal of Gerontology
36:
223
-232.
Fretz B. R., Kluge N. A., Ossana S. M., Jones S. M., Merikangas M. W.,
1989
. Intervention targets for reducing preretirement anxiety and depression. Journal of Counseling Psychology
36:
301
-307.
Gall T. L., Evans D. R., Howard J.,
1997
. The retirement adjustment process: Changes in the well-being of male retirees across time. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences
52B:
P110
-P117.
Gallo W. T., Bradley E. H., Siegel M., Kasl S. V.,
2000
. Health effects of involuntary job loss among older workers: Findings from the Health and Retirement Survey. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences
55B:
S131
-S140.
George L. K.,
1993
. Sociological perspectives on life transitions. Annual Review of Sociology
19:
353
-373.
George L. K., Fillenbaum G. G., Palmore E, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple. B.,
1984
. Sex differences in the antecedents and consequences of retirement. Journal of Gerontology
39:
364
-371.
George L. K., Maddox G. L.,
1977
. Subjective adaptation to loss of the work role: A longitudinal study. Journal of Gerontology
32:
456
-462.
Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html]
[dagger]\ Retirement Planning with a Younger Spouse
In most things, age is nothing but a number—but when it comes to financial planning, age DEFINITELY matters. #ProsperityFinancialGroup
Click to Tweet
Retirement planning is a complex topic, and it is doubly so when you and your spouse have a large age gap.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, about 9 percent of all married couples have an age gap of 10 years or more. Among men who are newly remarried, about 20 percent have a spouse who’s at least 10 years their junior, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple, versus 5 percent of men in their first marriage, according to the Pew Research Center.
If there are 10 or more years between you and your spouse, the standard advice doesn’t apply to your retirement plan.
Couples with a large age gap face a different longevity risk, sequence risk, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple risk capacity. You’re faced with the task of bridging differences in retirement funding and health care coverage for your younger spouse after you retire.
A mixed-age couple must synchronize their retirement plans to account for black senior dating sites in retirement dates, life expectancy, health, and other factors. Ensuring that the younger half of the pair will have sufficient income to last the duration of his or her life—and perhaps, several years as a widow or widower—is the most crucial aspect of planning for these couples.
When deciding how much to save for retirement, your retirement nest egg must sufficiently support both spouses who are at different stages in their careers and lives. Couples with a large age gap must plan for a much longer retirement than their peers in same-age marriages, because the younger spouse may live in retirement for many years.
This means it’s even more important than ever to have a well-thought out retirement plan!
Age-gap couples should work toward their retirement goals together while keeping individual differences in mind. To handle a lengthy timeline, your Fiduciary Financial Advisor can utilize a number of different strategies from maximizing Social Security benefits, to setting the correct balance for your investment portfolio, to finding smart ways to stretch the assets you already have.
As we collectively face a time of economic uncertainty, smart long-term planning can also offer you peace of mind.
Let’s dive into a few considerations that mixed-age couples should be aware of while navigating the retirement planning process.
Your Retirement Date
There’s no dollar figure tied to your date of retirement, but it’s an important consideration for couples with a wider age gap. Your decision has big implications for your retirement strategy.
In terms of lifestyle:
How will you go through life if one spouse continues working while the other is retired? Or, will both of you retire at the same time?
How will best sugar momma dating apps younger spouse cope with going to work when the older spouse is enjoying their hobbies or relaxing at home? It works in reverse, too—what will you do when you’re ready to pack your bags and travel the world, but your spouse is still working their 9-to-5 job?
There are two ways to approach this problem.
One answer is early retirement, in which case the both of you can stop working at the same time.
But if one spouse loves their career and has no problem working a few more years, your answer could be deferred retirement.
It’s essential that you both sit down and clarify each other’s expectations for how the working spouse’s income will be used, how you both feel about your new roles, and how you’ll spend your time. This will help mitigate feelings of resentment by the working spouse, as well as lack of purpose in the retired spouse.
There’s also a lot of upside to staggering your retirement dates. Early retirement for a young spouse can be costly; if both spouses retire simultaneously, the couple will lose out on years of additional income and retirement plan contributions by the younger spouse. Your portfolio will come under increased pressure as it must support even more years of retiree life.
Moreover, an early exit could also drastically reduce the size of the younger spouse’s Social Security check, especially if they’re in their peak earning years or have worked fewer than 35 years. Since Social Security benefits are based on an individual’s 35 highest-earning years, someone who is currently a high earner—but wasn’t in previous years—misses the chance to earn a higher benefit down the line.
Now if your younger spouse continues to work, you can maintain employer health coverage until both partners are eligible for Medicare. Maintaining at least one stream of active income would enable a mixed-age couple to meet household expenses for a longer period of time. Additionally, the younger spouse’s earnings can postpone the drawdown date, thus allowing you to continue building your retirement accounts and preserving your retirement funds.
Your Retirement Income Strategy
Your main priority should be reducing the likelihood that the younger spouse will outlive a joint-nest egg. When planning your retirement finances, base your retirement savings goal, asset allocation strategies, and portfolio withdrawal rates on the younger spouse’s life expectancy.
Does conventional advice apply to our situation?
Conventional retirement advice usually involves shifting your asset allocation mix away from riskier assets, like equities, and toward safer assets, like cash equivalents and fixed-income instruments as you grow closer to retirement. However, age-difference couples likely need to maintain higher equity allocations for longer in order to generate enough potential growth to support the younger spouse’s anticipated longer lifespan.
How does our drawdown strategy differ?
Another important distinction is your drawdown strategy: mixed-age couples may need to be more conservative when it comes to drawing down their portfolio, especially during the early years of retirement. To illustrate, a couple planning for a 30-year retirement faces higher risk for prematurely depleting their nest egg—and thus must withdraw more conservatively—than a couple planning for a 20-year retirement.
To determine how much growth is necessary to hit each spouse’s income target, estimate your day-to-day spending plus inflation. Don’t forget to anticipate surprise costs like unexpected home repairs and out-of-pocket medical expenses. We can help you establish individual portfolios with asset allocations that support short-term liquidity and safety needs in addition to future growth goals.
How should we claim Social Security retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple Security is usually a major source of income for retirees, providing between 30 to 50 percent of your income. Age-gap couples should take a slightly adjusted approach to Social Security in order to maximize their benefit.
Generally, if the older spouse was the higher earner, they should delay collecting Social Security until age 70. When you wait to tap those funds, your benefit will grow between 6.5 to 8 percent each year, after which your younger spouse will be entitled to a higher survivor benefit. By increasing that source of fixed income, you can provide an additional financial cushion to your lower-earning spouse’s Social Security benefit.
And if your younger spouse collects Social Security benefits early, this will likely reduce their Social Security benefits for life—by as much as 30 percent! Drawing benefits early could reduce their lifetime benefits and the survivor benefit far more than many pre-retirees realize.
Case Study:
Jude & Judy
Let’s consider the case of Jude and Judy, a married couple with a nine-year age gap.
Let’s say Jude is older and the higher earner and Judy’s benefit at full retirement age is at least half the amount of Jude's. Jude should typically base his claiming decision on Judy’s life expectancy because when he dies, she’ll receive a survivor benefit worth 100 percent of his benefit, assuming she’s full retirement age or older when she claims it.
That generally means Jude should wait until age 70 to claim his benefit, even if his own life expectancy is relatively short. By waiting until 70, Jude's already-higher benefit will earn an additional 8 percent in annual delayed-retirement credits, which will also be included in the survivor benefit.
Meanwhile, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple, Judy should base her claiming decision on the age she expects to be when Jude dies, because at that point she’ll switch from her own benefit to the higher survivor benefit. Judy should claim her benefits sooner rather than later—even claiming reduced benefits as early as age 62. Claiming her own benefit early won’t affect her survivor benefit.
Annuities
In addition to smart Social Security decision-making, you might consider buying an annuity to further augment income over your younger spouse’s lifetime.
Annuities are most appropriate for couples without pensions, and who want an additional stream of income above and beyond what their Social Security benefits supply. An income stream would begin years after purchase, and you’d have an additional income stream in retirement.
Are annuities right for you?
Annuities offer protected lifetime income to help cover your essential expenses — but they don't work for everyone. We can help you determine whether an annuity dating sites for singles over 50 fit your retirement income needs.
Get in touch to start the conversation today!
Watch Out for RMDs
Required minimum distributions (RMDs) are another important consideration among mixed-age couples. At age 70 ½, you must begin taking RMDs from your qualified retirement accounts like traditional IRAs and 401(k)s.
However, you should be aware of a provision in the tax code meant specifically to benefit mixed-age couples: If your spouse is at least 10 years younger, you can reduce the required withdrawals—and stretch your savings. Use the IRS’s joint life expectancy table to calculate the specific amounts. The larger your age difference, the smaller your RMD. That means you can keep more of your money growing in a tax-sheltered environment, thus preserving assets for your younger spouse’s longer lifespan.
To take advantage of this provision, your younger spouse must be the beneficiary on any traditional IRA, 401(k), 403(b), or 457 plan that you own.
Creating a spending strategy for your RMD income
If you have a strong balance sheet:
., retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple. Spend from your after-tax savings. Directing that income toward living expenses could free up additional money in your younger spouse’s paycheck for maxing out another retirement account, like a 401(k) or health savings account.
If your MAGI is below $196,000 in 2020:
. You can funnel RMDs and other income into a Roth IRA. Roth IRAs have no age cutoff, so you can move one spouse’s retirement withdrawals back into the other spouse’s retirement savings. It could also help prevent you from moving up a tax bracket; the bump in income from the RMD is offset by the reduced taxable income reported by the younger retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple Roth IRA
What if you want to do away with the hassle of RMDs altogether? Consider a Backdoor Roth.
If you’re already in the highest tax bracket and anticipate a sustained high income in retirement, think about making a conversion now. As of 2020, the top individual income tax rate was reduced from 39.5 percent to 37 percent. Income tax rates are unlikely to be lowered further in the future, so consider locking in that lower rate through a Roth conversion now, as opposed to paying taxes on RMDs each year at an unknown, future tax rate.
Regardless, it’s a good idea to time a conversion with one spouse’s retirement when the household income sees a significant dip. You may see big savings on your tax bill if you move down an income tax bracket! You can also stagger the conversion by converting a portion — for instance, 25 percent of the IRA each year over five years — to keep from entering a higher tax bracket.
Though there are many tax benefits to be had, a Roth conversion can also have some unintended consequences, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple. For instance, increasing income above specific MAGI levels could create more unexpected tax in other areas.

In addition to the immediate tax impact, also consider how it may influence your healthcare premium. If your younger spouse is under age 65 and plans to buy subsidized health insurance through a public exchange, the resulting boost in income from a conversion could reduce the potential amount of assistance. Pay special attention to your MAGI levels if you’re enrolled in a public exchange health plan or Medicare; each has their own MAGI tables to monitor where you might need to pay extra taxes.

Always consult a trusted Financial Advisor before converting a traditional IRA to a Roth IRA.
Your Pension
If you’re entitled to a pension, ask your Fiduciary Financial Advisor whether it makes more sense to take the joint-and-survivor payout option versus taking the lump sum and rolling it over to an IRA.
With the joint-and-survivor payout option, you’ll trade a higher monthly check in order to preserve payments to your younger spouse. After you die, your spouse will receive 100 percent of your pension for life. This can provide huge financial retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple to mixed-age couples, as it ensures yet another stream of retirement income to last the duration of retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple younger spouse’s life. It’s especially important if the younger spouse needs to cover medical and personal care costs for their aging spouse, and even more so during those widow or widower years.
Finally, consider how the joint-and-survivor annuity can help you save on medical costs. If both partners worked and saved for retirement, there may be situations in which the surviving spouse doesn’t need the survivor pension benefit for income but does need it for access to health insurance.
Your Investment Portfolio
Conventional retirement planning advice says to transition your investment mix from a more aggressive portfolio to a conservative portfolio of assets. After all, it makes sense to transition from a growth-oriented strategy to a wealth-preserving one as you age. However, this advice doesn’t apply if your spouse is significantly younger.
With a decade-younger spouse, you’ll need to invest for an extended drawdown period. It’s a mistake for couples to base their entire portfolio on the older partner, as the younger spouse could potentially miss out on additional growth and earnings. The retirement bucket needs to last through the younger spouse’s life expectancy, which could be an extra 15 years beyond the older spouse’s passing.
So what should you do?
In general, your equity exposure needs to remain higher than that of your peers with same-age spouses. Maintain a slightly more aggressive portfolio later in life than what’s typically recommended for couples who are closer in age. That way, you can capture enough growth to support both of your retirement time horizons.
Taking this approach will also help you outpace inflation. Even though you have higher risk for losses during a market decline, your younger spouse can help offset them with ongoing contributions if they’re still working. If it makes you nervous to allocate a higher percentage of your financial assets to stocks, you’ll have to plan on a lower level of spending.
The Prosperity Difference
Prosperity specializes in creating a balanced retirement plan for mixed-age couples that factors in your investment income, risk level, and any fixed-income assets or other financial products you may own.
Your Retirement Spending Strategy
Making your nest egg last for 25 years takes careful budget planning. For age-gap couples facing 35-plus years in retirement, it’s even more important to develop a spending plan.
For same-age couples, the standard withdrawal recommendation hovers around 4 percent, with a raise for inflation in each subsequent year. This tends to work well when each partner retires chinese american dating sites the same time and makes withdrawals at the same rate throughout retirement.
But when a mixed-age couple wants to retire, the withdrawal rate drops to what is appropriate for the youngest person. For an age-gap couple—say, one in their 60s, one in their late 40s—the withdrawal rate would need to be scaled back to a more modest percentage, likely around 2 to 2.5 percent.
Your safe withdrawal rate also depends on how much guaranteed income you have. For instance, if you’re a couple with 95 percent of your income guaranteed, you’d be able to withdraw 5 percent per year. If you have only 5 percent guaranteed income, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple, expect to take out 2 percent per year.
Your Fiduciary Financial Advisor can help you create a retirement financial model that accounts for your full unique financial situation.
Retirement Tools for Strategic Planning
When planning for retirement with a younger spouse, your financial portfolio can benefit from additional retirement tools. Strengthen your retirement plan with strategies to maximize your health insurance, long-term care insurance, and life insurance.
Health Insurance
For any couple, health care expenses can quickly deplete in your nest egg. According to a Milliman report, a healthy 65-year-old couple retiring in 2020 is projected to spend approximately $351,000 in today’s dollars ($535,000 in future dollars) on health care over their lifetime. And a healthy 45-year-old couple is projected to spend approximately $505,000 in today’s dollars ($1.4 million in future dollars).
As retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple mixed-age couple, your retirement plan needs to build in greater expenses in your later years to account for rising health care costs.
When deciding on each partner’s retirement timing, consider the issues of Medicare eligibility and health insurance coverage for the younger spouse. If the younger spouse wants to retire around the same time as retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple older spouse, there may be a sizable gap before becoming eligible for Medicare.
If the older spouse covers the couple’s health insurance and switches to Medicare at 65, the younger spouse will need to buy an individual health policy. Plan around this by setting aside a separate bucket to pay for health care for your younger spouse.
If you don’t have enough assets to do so, the cost of health coverage can be a dating a desperate girl. Health insurance is currently an uncertain market, with premiums going up. Don’t underestimate the value of staying employed if it provides health coverage! If the younger spouse maintains employer health coverage, that could also become the supplemental policy for the older spouse who is on Medicare.
Long-Term Care Insurance
The threat of huge medical bills looms as a possibility in every retiree’s future. For age-gap couples, that risk is magnified. An older spouse who needs extensive long-term care could potentially exhaust the retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple egg, leaving the younger spouse with little to live on for the rest of their life.
Age-gap couples do have one retirement advantage when it comes to long-term care: Younger spouses can act as caregiver to a sick older spouse if needed. But what about the younger spouse’s long-term care needs?
Here’s one option to add some financial security: Buy long-term care insurance, particularly hybrid products that combine long-term care coverage with life insurance. Long-term care insurance usually covers in-home care services and nursing home costs for a certain length of time. A surviving spouse could also use the life insurance proceeds to supplement retirement savings.
One thing to keep in mind: the premiums pics of women from dating sites steep, and they increase with age. Begin researching this option when the older spouse hits retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple mid-50s, when health problems haven’t yet appeared, and the insurance coverage won’t be onerously expensive.
Speak to a trusted Financial Advisor to help create a long-term care plan that ensures you and your spouse can afford the help you might need without creating excessive financial strain.
Life Insurance
Life insurance is another option to help you protect your younger spouse’s retirement security. It could help cover a savings and longevity difference; the younger spouse can spend more comfortably while the older spouse is living, knowing that the bucket will be replenished upon their death.
Term life insurance is popular because it’s a cost-effective way to provide a benefit to your family after you pass away. However, an older spouse in retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple mixed-age marriage should consider a permanent life insurance policy instead.
The death benefit of permanent life insurance is generally income tax-free when the policy owner dies, and can be used to support the younger spouse later in retirement. Some policies offer a rider that allows you to receive a tax-free advance on the death benefit to help cover the costs of long-term care. That way, the younger spouse won’t have to deplete retirement savings to care for the older spouse if health conditions arise. Or, the younger spouse could use the funds from the death benefit later in retirement.
Getting Mentally Prepared
Financial planning is vital for mixed-age couples nearing retirement age, but there’s also a psychological aspect. While the older spouse may be looking forward to the freedom of sleeping in, having a full day of leisure activities, and possibly launching a new venture, the younger spouse will still need to finish out their career.
Now is the time to hash things out: Will there be guilt or frustration if one retires and the other continues working? And how long is too long—what if the younger spouse is ready to retire and see the world, but the older spouse no longer has the energy to keep up?
Always remember to discuss retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple lifestyle goals for retirement in addition to your financial goals. Talk about what’s most important to you and what do guys look for in dating profiles a compromise. Approaching retirement on the same page will result in success for both parties.

We Can Help
Needless to say, mixed-age couples are contending with several moving parts. When you’re faced with unique circumstances like a large age gap, it’s imperative to have a well-founded retirement strategy. There are a lot of ways to get off track and the stakes are far too high.
As your Fiduciary Financial Advisors, our goal is to give you a clear view of the steps ahead as you enter your next chapter of life. If you’re interested in professional guidance in planning your retirement, please fill out the form below. We look forward to speaking with you.
DISCLAIMER: Advisory Services offered through Prosperity Financial Group, Inc., an Independent Registered Investment Advisor. Securities offered through Fortune Financial Services, Inc. Member FINRA/SIPC. Prosperity Financial Group, Inc. and Fortune Financial Services, Inc. are separate entities.
Advisory Services offered through Prosperity Financial Group, Inc., an independent registered investment advisor. Securities offered through Fortune Financial Services, Inc. Member FINRA/SIPC. Prosperity Financial Group, Inc. and Fortune Financial Services, Inc. are separate entities.
Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html]
Financial Benefits of Marriage vs. Being Single – What’s Better?
Each year, about 2 million Americans get married, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple, according to figures from the National Center for Health Statistics. No doubt all those newlyweds — or at least most of them — believe tying the knot will make them happier. What they might not think about is whether it could also make them wealthier.
A 2005 study from The Ohio State University (OSU) found that people saw a sharp increase in their level of wealth after getting married. After 10 years of marriage, the couples reported an average net worth of around $43,000 compared to $11,000 for people who had stayed single.
However, people who had married and then divorced were worse off than any other group. After a divorce, the average man was left with $8,500 in assets, while the average divorced woman had only $3,400.
As this study shows, getting married has risks as well as benefits. Furthermore, many factors play a role in how marriage affects your finances. The benefits of marriage vary based on your income, your living situation, and (most of all) whether you have children.

Motley Fool Stock Advisor recommendations have an average return of 618%. For $79 (or just $1.52 per week), join more than retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple million members and don't miss their upcoming stock picks. 30 day money-back guarantee. Sign Up Now
As a result, it’s impossible to say that married people are always financially better off than single people or vice versa. What is possible is to examine the financial pluses and minuses of marriage and figure out how they might affect you, either now or in the future.
Costs and Benefits of Marriage
The OSU study doesn’t explore the reasons married couples can sock away more money, but the author, Jay Zagorsky, suggests several possibilities.
Married couples can save money by sharing household expenses and duties. Additionally, couples enjoy many benefits single people don’t when it comes to insurance, retirement, and taxes.
But being married carries some financial costs as well. For example, weddings are a significant expense for many couples. Also, the tax laws that benefit some couples result in a penalty for others. And finally, there’s always the risk a marriage will end in divorce, which is one of the biggest financial setbacks you can suffer.
Wedding Debt
Many couples start married life with a substantial one-time expense: a big wedding. According to a 2021 LendEDU survey, the average wedding in the United States costs over $10,000. A 2019 survey by The Knot came up with an even higher average: nearly $30,000. Either way, it’s a lot to spend on a one-day event.
More troubling still is that many couples go into debt to pay for their big day. About 1 in 3 couples in the LendEDU survey borrowed money for wedding costs. These couples spent more — close to $18,000, on average — and borrowed nearly two-thirds of that.
That’s a big problem for both their finances and their future happiness. A 2012 study by the New Economics Foundation shows that people who have credit card debt are generally unhappier, and unmanageable debt can lead to mental problems like anxiety and depression.
The Marriage Penalty
After the honeymoon is over, married couples come home and settle into a new routine together. One retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple the changes many newlyweds have to adjust to retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple filing a joint tax return. And in certain cases, that means dealing with the marriage penalty.
The marriage penalty exists because tax brackets — the income levels at which tax rates shift — aren’t always exactly twice as high for couples as they are for single people. As a result, couples who file their taxes jointly sometimes pay more than they would as two single people.
The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 eliminated the marriage penalty for most Americans. However, it can still apply to couples making over $622,050 per year. They pay a higher percentage of that income in taxes than a single person making $311,000.
But even high-income couples don’t always pay this penalty. If one spouse earns all or most of the income, the couple may get a “marriage bonus” instead. In other words, they pay less in taxes for their joint income than they would individually.
Ironically, very low-income couples can also face a marriage penalty. That’s because people who qualify for the earned income tax credit (EITC) get less money back when they file a joint return.
In 2020, a childless couple with a combined income of retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple would get only $359 from the EITC. By contrast, two single people making $8,500 would each get $538. Getting married would cost this low-income couple $717 — about 4% of their total income.
Other Tax Issues
Leaving the marriage penalty aside, married couples definitely get some tax perks that aren’t available to single people. These include:
Extra Deductions. Even if your income doesn’t double after marriage, your income tax deductions can. The standard deduction the IRS allows for couples is exactly twice as high as the deduction for single people. These doubled deductions effectively give a bonus to couples with one nonworking spouse who wouldn’t file a tax return otherwise. They get to take a deduction for both spouses rather than just the retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple who’s working.
Estate Taxes. If you leave behind a substantial estate when you die — “substantial” meaning $11.7 million or more in 2021 — the government skims an estate tax off before the money passes to your heirs. But any money you leave directly to your legal spouse is exempt from this tax. If you have $20 million and leave it all to your spouse, the government can’t touch a penny of it.
Gift Taxes. Some people try to get around the estate tax by giving large sums of cash to relatives before they die. To close this loophole, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple, the IRS charges a gift tax retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple any gifts of $15,000 or more. However, like the estate tax, this tax doesn’t apply to your spouse. You can give your spouse any sum of money — or other valuable items, such as jewelry — without paying tax on it.
Home Sales. When you sell your home, you don’t have to pay capital gains tax on the first $250,000 of profit if you’re single. But if you’re married, and you and your spouse have both lived in the house for at least two of the last five years, this exemption doubles. That means you can make $500,000 on the sale of your home and pay no tax at all.
Health Benefits
Married couples often have more choices for health insurance coverage. If employers of both spouses provide health plans, they can each keep their own workplace coverage or they can both join one spouse’s plan. That gives them more options to choose the doctors they prefer or save money on premiums.
If one spouse doesn’t have health coverage from work, health benefits are even more critical. Getting married makes it possible for the uninsured spouse to get coverage through the other spouse’s employer, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple. That’s usually more affordable than paying for an individual policy.
Retirement Benefits
Married couples have more options when it comes to retirement benefits as well. These include:
IRA Contributions. If you’re single and unemployed, you can’t contribute to an individual retirement account (IRA). However, if you’re a stay-at-home spouse, you can set up a spousal IRA and contribute from your joint income.
Inherited Benefits. In many retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple, if you inherit another person’s Roth IRA, you must start making withdrawals from it promptly. But if you inherit your spouse’s Roth IRA, you have the option to transfer it to a Roth IRA in your own name and make no withdrawals until you retire.
Social Security. Married couples have many more options for collecting Social Security benefits. You can either collect your own benefits or take a payment equal to 50% of your spouse’s benefit — even if that’s more than you’d be entitled to on your own. You can also choose to delay your own benefits to increase the payout and take the spousal benefit in the meantime. Even a nonworking spouse who has never contributed to Social Security at all can still collect spousal benefits.
The Risk of Divorce
Perhaps the greatest financial risk dating a woman who doesnt drive getting retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple is the possibility of ending up divorced. While being married is generally better for your wallet than being single, getting a divorce cancels that benefit — and then some.
The OSU study shows that on average, divorced people have 77% less wealth than single people in the same age group.
Interestingly, the drop in a couple’s fortunes doesn’t happen immediately after the divorce. In fact, the couple’s wealth usually starts to decline about four years before they end the marriage.
Zagorsky, the author of the study, says that could happen because many couples separate before they officially divorce, taking on the additional cost of maintaining separate households. Another possibility is that the stress of a failing marriage hurts each spouse’s ability to work and earn money.
The impact of divorce continues long after a couple splits up. The newly single people see their wealth start to creep upward again within a year, but it doesn’t increase very fast. Even 10 years after a retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple, their median wealth is still below $10,000 — less than the $11,000 average for people who stayed single.
The Role of Parenthood
Bringing up children is a huge expense. The 2017 U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Expenditures on Children by Families report shows that a family with a child born in 2015 can expect to spend more than $233,000 raising that child to adulthood.
Decades ago, this cost seldom affected single people. An analysis by the Pew Research Center shows that in 1968, only 7% of parents living with a child were unmarried. By 2017, 1 in 4 parents living with children was single, and 1 in 4 children lived with just one parent.
And in 2019, 40% of all babies were born to single parents, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Vital Statistics Report.
Having children is a financial game-changer for both single and married people. Child care and increased housing costs eat up a large share of any parent’s income.
However, there’s no doubt that raising kids is easier with two people to share the burden. Not only do couples tend to have higher incomes, but they also have more choices for dealing with child care.
Child Care Costs
A 2021 survey by Care.com found that more than half of all families spent over $10,000 on child care in 2020. For a family with two children in day care, the average cost is $640 per week — over $30,000 per year. More than 85% of parents say they spend at least 10% of their income on child care.
However, for many married couples, there are ways of avoiding this cost. Couples have options that aren’t available to most single parents, such as:
Stay-at-Home Parenting. Some parents avoid child care costs by having one spouse quit working at least for a year or so to care for the children full-time. Mothers are more likely than fathers to take on this role. A 2018 Pew study found that in 2016, 27% of all mothers were stay-at-home moms and 7% of fathers were stay-at-home dads.
Work-at-Home Parenting. New technologies, such as email and teleconferencing, make it possible for some parents to work from home. Although this job arrangement is sometimes possible for single parents, couples with two jobs have double the chance of making it work. It’s also easier when the other parent has a full-time job since many work-at-home opportunities are freelance, and freelance jobs often have unpredictable income and no benefits.
Split-Shift Parenting. Some parents choose to adjust their schedules so one of them is always at home with the kids. For example, one parent works the overnight shift and returns home before the other leaves for work in the morning. Split-shift parenting means both parents get to spend time with their children, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple, but it leaves them very little time to spend with each other, which can strain the marriage.
Housing Costs
According to the USDA report, housing costs are the single most significant factor in the cost of raising a child. For married, middle-income parents, nearly 30% of the money spent on a first child goes toward increased housing costs. Child care and education account for only 16%.
Part of the reason for this is that a bigger family simply needs more space. A family with two children needs at least two bedrooms, preferably three, while a single person or a couple with no children can get by with one.
However, parents also tend to pay more for housing because they want their kids to go to the best schools, and homes in these school districts tend to be expensive.
Every year, the education review website Niche names the top school districts in the country. It also provides links to nearby homes for each district. In 7 of the top 10 districts for 2022, a three-bedroom home costs at least $380,000. By contrast, Zillow puts the mexican women dating home price for the whole country at just over $308,000.
Fortunately, there are some exceptions to this rule. For instance, the top school district on Niche’s list is in Lincolnshire, Illinois, where three-bedroom homes start at around $290,000. And in No. 4 Vernon, Illinois, they can go for under $170,000.
Websites like Finder and 24WallSt have identified affordable neighborhoods with good schools throughout the U.S. Choosing a home in one of these neighborhoods can help parents keep their housing costs in check while still giving their children an excellent education.
Tax Breaks for Parents
Because raising children is so expensive, the IRS provides an array of tax breaks for parents to help offset the cost. These include:
The Child Tax Credit. This credit reduces parents’ taxes by up to $2,000 per child. Married couples with combined incomes up to $400,000 can take the full amount. So can single parents with incomes up to $200,000, regardless of whether they file as single, head of household, or qualifying widow or widower. Above these income levels, the credit gradually shrinks. Since the amount for a couple is twice the amount for an individual, this perk is exactly as good for single or married parents.
The Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit. Parents who have to pay for child care can deduct a portion of these costs through the child and dependent care tax credit. This credit provides up to $3,000 for the care of a child under 13 and up to $6,000 for two or more. There’s no income limit for this tax credit, but the percentage of your costs you get back is lower for higher incomes. It starts at 35% for incomes up to $15,000 and gradually drops down to 20% for incomes of $43,000 or more, no matter your filing status. That means a single parent with a $30,000 income who pays $10,000 per year for day care, could get back 27% of that amount, or $2,700. By contrast, a married couple with a $60,000 income and the same day care expenses would get back only 20% of the cost, or $2,000 — just $1,000 per person.
Flexible Spending Accounts. Parents can also offset their child care costs by using a flexible spending account (FSA) if their employer offers one. With an FSA, a parent can set aside up to $5,000 in pretax dollars for child care. It’s an alternative to taking the child and dependent care tax credit in most cases. However, parents who have two or more children and child care expenses of more than $5,000 per year can do both. They can set aside $5,000 in an FSA and claim a tax credit for up to $1,000 in costs over that amount.
Having a child also increases the amount you can get from the earned retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple tax credit. The maximum credit for people with no children is $1,502 for tax year 2021. However, this amount jumps to $3,618 for people with one child and maxes out at $6,728 for parents with three kids or more. These numbers are the same for single and married parents.
Having kids makes it easier to qualify for the EITC as well. A single person with no children needs an income of $21,430 or less to qualify, but a single person with one child can qualify with up to $42,158 in income. For a married couple, the limits are $27,380 with no kids and $48,108 with one. Additional children increase these limits still more.
The IRS’s EITC Assistant shows how the EITC differs for single parents and married ones. For the tax year 2020, a married couple with two children at home and an adjusted gross income (AGI) of $40,000 would get $2,802 from the EITC — just $1,401 per person.
By contrast, a single person with two children at home and an AGI of $20,000, filing as head of household, would get $5,774. So this is a case where the marriage penalty deals a big blow to married couples.
Tax Filing Status
Most tax credits are available both for couples who file joint returns and single parents who file as head of household. Parents who file as head of household have lower tax rates than other single people, and they can also take a higher standard deduction. Compared to married couples, they pay more in taxes for the same amount of income, but they still end up paying less per person.
For example, suppose a head of household earns $60,000 per year and takes the standard deduction, the child tax credit, and $2,000 from the child and dependent care tax credit. After these deductions and credits, this person would owe $660 in taxes on that income.
A married couple with the same $60,000 in income between them using the same deductions and credits would pay no tax at all. However, a married couple where each spouse earned $60,000 for a combined income of $120,000 would pay $8,375, more than 10 times as much as the single head of household.
In short, this is a case in which single parents get a much-needed break.
Sharing a Home
OSU study author Zagorsky speculated that the reason married couples save more than single people could be that they’re more likely to share a household. By sharing expenses such as rent, food, and utilities, they can spend less than two single people who live alone.
The annual Consumer Expenditure Survey conducted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics supports this theory. It shows that the average single person spends $45,701 per year, while the average two-income couple spends $78,249. By combining their expenses, the couple saves $13,153 each year.
However, these benefits aren’t just for married couples. Single people can get them by sharing a home with a roommate, a family member, or a significant other. Sharing a household is one of the best ways for single people to close the wealth gap and start saving early for big expenses down the road.
Shared Expenses
According to an old saying, “Two can live as cheaply as one.” That’s not exactly accurate, but it’s definitely true that two people living together and sharing all their expenses can live more cheaply than two people maintaining separate households.
Housing costs are a good example. Suppose two people live in identical one-bedroom apartments, each paying $1,620 per month — roughly the national average, according to Rent.com, retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple. If they move in together and share just one of these apartments, they immediately cut their rent in half.
Even if they upgrade to a two-bedroom apartment to give themselves more space, they can still cut their total housing bill by a sizable amount. The average monthly rent for a two-bedroom apartment is only about $1,880, so they’d still cut their costs by about 42%.
People sharing a household can save on all sorts of other expenses as well. It’s easier for them to buy groceries in bulk — for instance, getting a gallon of milk instead of a half-gallon without worrying it’ll go bad before they finish it. They can share one landline phone bill, combine their home insurance policies, and share loads at the coin laundry.
All these savings can add up to thousands of dollars each year.
Shared Responsibilities
People who live alone also have to do all the work of maintaining the home by themselves. Keeping up with household tasks like cleaning, cooking, and laundry can feel overwhelming.
After a while, it’s tempting to hire someone else to take care of it — and that can get expensive. According to Angi (formerly Angie’s List), the average cost of a house cleaning is around $170. Getting one every two weeks would come to $4,420 per year.
By contrast, living with a partner or a roommate can ease the burden on both of you. If one person cooks dinner, the other can do the dishes. If one does the laundry, the other can clean the bathroom. Since cooking or cleaning for two people doesn’t take much longer than doing it for one, that cuts way down on the amount of time these chores take.
People who live alone also spend more in less obvious ways. For instance, when you’re going through a crunch at work, you often get home late and don’t retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple the time or energy to cook. If you share your home, you can ask your partner or your roommate to take over the cooking until your work crisis is over.
But if you live alone and don’t have this option, you’re more likely to end up eating out at restaurants every night. Eating out costs a lot more retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple cooking at home — anywhere from $5 for a burger and fries at McDonald’s to $100 or more at a French bistro.
Alternatively, you might turn to convenience foods from the grocery store, such as frozen dinners, to get you through your busy period. These are cheaper than a restaurant meal, but they’re still far more expensive than cooking from scratch.
Final Word
There’s no doubt marriage offers some advantages compared to being single. However, both financially and emotionally, introduction message on dating site much better to stay single than to marry the wrong person. Marrying someone who doesn’t share your values and goals is a good recipe for a bumpy marriage and a painful and expensive divorce.
So if you’re single now but plan to marry someday, the most important thing you can do is choose your partner carefully. Ensure you understand and agree with each other’s financial goals so you’re working together and not against each other.
And if you’re already married, it’s not too late to have this conversation. By taking the time to talk about your financial needs and goals, you can keep your marriage and finances strong.
Stock Advisor
Motley Fool Stock Advisor recommendations have an average return of 618%. For $79 (or just $1.52 per week), join more than 1 million members and don't miss their upcoming stock picks. 30 day money-back guarantee.
Sign Up
Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html]}

−.02 (.02)

Subjective Health Change

.13 (.05)^**

−.45 (.23)^{\

Posted in Antivirus

Comments

- says:

26.07.2019 at 17:39

-

Reply

- says:

29.07.2019 at 08:48

-

Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Comment
Name *
Email *
Website
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Posts navigation
navigate_beforeOlder posts

Search for:

Recent Posts

Fat girl dating apps

Dating Russian Women

Dating chat rooms free

Things about dating a asian girl

Lance guy online dating profile

Recent Comments
- on Retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple
Archives

October 2012

Categories

Best Gifts Under $50
Gift Guides
Gift Guides
Cookie Policy
Best Dating Sites
Antivirus
Best of Tech
Advertise
Best Bluetooth Speakers
Advertise
Best Cordless Vacuum
Entertainment
Headphones
Social Good Summit

Meta

Log in
Entries feed
Comments feed
WordPress.org

keyboard_arrow_up

Theme: Noto Simple}

watch the thematic video

Retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple - can suggest

Financial Benefits of Marriage vs. Being Single – What’s Better?

Costs and Benefits of Marriage

Wedding Debt

The Marriage Penalty

Other Tax Issues

Health Benefits

Retirement Benefits

The Risk of Divorce

The Role of Parenthood

Child Care Costs

Housing Costs

Tax Breaks for Parents

Tax Filing Status

Sharing a Home

Shared Expenses

Shared Responsibilities

Final Word

Stock Advisor

HOV lane for her, off-ramp for him

Money, money, money

5 (Financial) Things to Consider Before Marrying Later in Life

Key Takeaways

1. Combining Finances After Marriage

2. Updating Tax Filing Information

3. Estate Planning with a New Spouse

Prenuptial agreements

Trusts and wills

4. Updating Info With the Social Security Administration

5. Reviewing Medicaid Benefits

The Bottom Line

Retirement and marriage: the pitfalls of dating mixed-retirement couple - suggest

Coping With the Stress Children Add to a Marriage

Challenges of Marriage With Children

Top Relationship Stressors for Parents

Less Time Together

Less Time Solo

More Demands on the Partnership

Special Circumstances

What Children Add to a Marriage

Coping With Post-Kids Marriage Problems

Find Social Support

Practice Self Care

Work on Maintaining Balance

Focus on Your Frame of Mind

A Word From Verywell

HOV lane for her, off-ramp for him

Money, money, money

Financial Benefits of Marriage vs. Being Single – What’s Better?

Costs and Benefits of Marriage

Wedding Debt

The Marriage Penalty

Other Tax Issues

Health Benefits

Retirement Benefits

The Risk of Divorce

The Role of Parenthood

Child Care Costs

Housing Costs

Tax Breaks for Parents

Tax Filing Status

Sharing a Home

Shared Expenses

Shared Responsibilities

Final Word

Stock Advisor

5 (Financial) Things to Consider Before Marrying Later in Life

Key Takeaways

1. Combining Finances After Marriage

2. Updating Tax Filing Information

3. Estate Planning with a New Spouse

Prenuptial agreements

Trusts and wills

4. Updating Info With the Social Security Administration

5. Reviewing Medicaid Benefits

The Bottom Line

Retirement Transitions, Gender, and Psychological Well-Being: A Life-Course, Ecological Model

Abstract

Theoretical Background

Case Study:
Jude & Judy